Sean Manchester - Vampire Hunter

[Clu]

to Myth

I can honestly say that I'd never heard of these two bafoons before these threads and have nothing invested in either side 'winning' or 'loosing'

 

[Ducky]

to Myth

I can honestly say that I'd never heard of these two bafoons before these threads and have nothing invested in either side 'winning' or 'loosing'

Nor do I, but I can plainly see who has been more insulting, and who has threatened legal action, and who is less forthcoming with their own relationship with the situation.

 

[Clu]

It seems that mudslinging is not a one-way affaire... How are we to examine all message boards on the net...? why would we want to? give us facts missrepresented and un-missrepresent them

 

[Clu]

my former post was directed at Myth, just to clarify things

 

[Ducky]

Why won't Greenwych be banned for her direct insult to which I was only replying. If you feel that I, or indeed Sean Manchester, spend countless hours every day posting drivel about Farrant and his helpers on umpteen message boards, please provide the evidence.

I don't need to post the evidence, you provided it here. In a matter of days you have 90 posts in which you have insulted, threatened legal action on behalf of Manchester and refused to disclose your involvement with this situation in any discernable manner.

Now go to Barbara Greenwych's message boards and her two friends' message boards and look at the frequency of anti-Manchester rhetoric. Then put a search in using their names and key words like "Sean Manchester" to discover how much time they all spend posting hate.

And those are her message boards, and I don't care. You haven't rebutted what allegations against manchester are false in any way here, only attacked those posting them. Pony up the evidence man.

You will find they are posting day and night, month after month, year in year out. They are compulsive and harassing in the extreme. Sometimes they are threatening. Much of the illegal content, especially copyright theft, has been removed, I am advised, but why should anyone have to put up with such behaviour?

So what? Public figures get roasted on the internet all the time. The focus has always been on this forum for you to address things here and not bring the past feud into it. I have seen no effort on your part ot heed Darat's warnings and stay on point to this forum, this thread, and this situation. You cannot simply say "they spew hate" and expect anyone here to take you seriously when you don't address with any measure of acceptability what it is you object to.

 

[DavidFarrant]

Alleged photograph of 'staked vampire'.

I Challenge Thee, Mr. Manchester

I have above summarised the accounts you have given in your two self-published books on the Highgate 'vampire'. One, you say, you 'staked through his heart' but photographed it before you incinerated it (coffin and all) with a can of petrol. (The other you say turned into a 'giant spider' which you also staked - but forget about 'her' for the moment).

You publish this photograph (I believe there were two very similiar) in your two books (and have produced it on National television as 'proof' of the existence of the Highgate 'vampire'.

In the 2nd edition of your 'book' the caption reads:

"Pictures showing the vampire in rapid stages of decompositionwhich were televisedin 1990. Only after exorcism [you surely mean 'staking?] was capture on film possible".

So, by your own admission, you have evidence of the existence of the Highgate 'vampire'.

Well, if you can forget insulting others and myself for the moment, I challenge you here to produce these photograps AND THE CORRESPONDING NEGATIVES for examination.

I am sure James Randi (sorry James to subject you to this!) would keep to his word if your photographs proved to be irrefutible evidence as to the existence of 'vampires'.

Well Sean? I understand that the two television programmes did not request to see the negatives - let alone examine these.

So would you be prepred to produce these. Just think you could then prove the falsity of all these 'nasty lies' people have been spreading about you.

For the moment (although I am prepaped for a long wait!)

David Farrant

"

 

[Clu]

Nor do I, but I can plainly see who has been more insulting, and who has threatened legal action, and who is less forthcoming with their own relationship with the situation.

It does seem quite clear to me also... I do not feel that I have insulted Myth to any great degree (I have tried to limit myself to Manchester),M who is the focus of this thread even if focus has been shifted by some dark force

 

[Ducky]

I Challenge Thee, Mr. Manchester

I have above summarised the accounts you have given in your two self-published books on the Highgate 'vampire'. One, you say, you 'staked through his heart' but photographed it before you incinerated it (coffin and all) with a can of petrol. (The other you say turned into a 'giant spider' which you also staked - but forget about 'her' for the moment).

You publish this photograph (I believe there were two very similiar) in your two books (and have produced it on National television as 'proof' of the existence of the Highgate 'vampire'.

In the 2nd edition of your 'book' the caption reads:

"Pictures showing the vampire in rapid stages of decompositionwhich were televisedin 1990. Only after exorcism [you surely mean 'staking?] was capture on film possible".

So, by your own admission, you have evidence of the existence of the Highgate 'vampire'.

Well, if you can forget insulting others and myself for the moment, I challenge you here to produce these photograps AND THE CORRESPONDING NEGATIVES for examination.

I am sure James Randi (sorry James to subject you to this!) would keep to his word if your photographs proved to be irrefutible evidence as to the existence of 'vampires'.

Well Sean? I understand that the two television programmes did not request to see the negatives - let alone examine these.

So would you be prepred to produce these. Just think you could then prove the falsity of all these 'nasty lies' people have been spreading about you.

For the moment (although I am prepaped for a long wait!)

David Farrant

"

James Randi is not available at the moment due to this week's conference in Vegas known as "The Amazing Meeting" nor does he normally bother to deal with these boards, so for the moment we have only forum members.

However, good show. Let's get to the heart of the matter. Where is the evidence Mr. Manchester?

 

[Cuddles]

Edit : oops, bad comprehension on my part. Nothing to see here.

 

[Ducky]

http://groups.msn.com/TheEnigmaofTheOldCatholicChurch

http://groups.msn.com/bossybishopsandnaughtynuns

... and, of course, Farrant's own forum which is already known and is undoubtedly one of the worst offenders. Yet on other people's blogsites and message boards they are willing to take far greater risks, including gross libel, threats and a variety of violations and infringements of a person's rights. I do not have the URLs to all these but Scott Johnson's AMCGLTD and Alex Lucard's forum will find examples of what I mean. There are many others.

Everything they post about Sean Manchester is malicious and fabricated with the intention of causing him and his family maximum harm.

And as I have said before, I don't (and no one else here does either) care about what happens elsewhere on the internet. What falsehoods have they posted on this forum in these threads and what evidence do you have to show they are false?

 

[Myth Buster]

James Randi is not available at the moment due to this week's conference in Vegas known as "The Amazing Meeting" nor does he normally bother to deal with these boards, so for the moment we have only forum members. However, good show. Let's get to the heart of the matter. Where is the evidence Mr. Manchester?

How many more times do I have to say that Sean Manchester is NOT posting here?

Darat believes I am "affiliated" to Manchester and his organisations. By my understanding of what that means, I am not, but by the looser understanding of what that means I am "connected" to both Manchester and his organisations. How else could I have researched as much as I have done? But that is not all I am "connected" to for the purpose of research.

Does any of this matter? Why have those possibly affiliated to Farrant not been cross-examined in a similar way and threatened with a ban by Darat? They have made many personal insults and posted violations after a moderator's warning not to pursue the falsehood that I am Manchester.

 

[Clu]

I agree with fowlsound that we cannot peruse the entire length of these boards, and even if we had such a masochistic streak it would be utterly pointless to this discussion since we cannot be expected to fact-check all claims made by all parties involved. So if you have facts that dispute any claims made here in this forum I'd be willing to look at them...

 

[Clu]

As I said there have been mud-slinging on both sides... But where are the errors? you say that all that's been said by your apparant opponent is false yet when asked for proof you give us links to other message boards...

 

[Ducky]

How many more times do I have to say that Sean Manchester is NOT posting here?

Given the timeframe between manchester emailing the JREF about these threads and you showing up with all you vagueness about your affiliation I find it hard to believe Manchester is not directly appraised of these threads by you. Indeed, you admitted you are in direct contact with Manchester or his people with this post:

No apology. And, furthermore, I have been asked by Sean Manchester's people to stay off this topic as a complaint is already under consideration within the terms of the Religious Hatred Act 2006, section 1, 29C 1 (http://www.opsi.gov.uk/acts/acts2006/60001--b.htm).

It would, therefore, be inappropriate to further broach this matter.

So whether he is posting directly or you acting as proxy, your statement is demonstratably false.

Darat believes I am "affiliated" to Manchester and his organisations. By my understanding of what that means, I am not, but by the looser understanding of what that means I am "connected" to both Manchester and his organisations. How else could I have researched as much as I have done? But that is not all I am "connected" to for the purpose of research.

And as I have pointed out that is incongruent with your statements. You have (as I have shown) demonstrated a direct connection to manchester's organizations.

Does any of this matter? Why have those possibly affiliated to Farrant not been cross-examined in a similar way and threatened with a ban by Darat? They have made many personal insults and posted violations after a moderator's warning not to pursue the falsehood that I am Manchester.

Given that you consistantly maintain you are not part of the organization and on some goodwill defense mission for Manchester, yes it matters a great deal. Your credibility is directly at stake. While I don't find myself agreeing with Ferrant on matters, he and his friends have been very up front about who they are. You, however, seem to want to keep it a secret:

I was investigating the situation long before the thread on this forum and have had email and snail mail communication with various people from both sides, but not the main protagonists.

If you knew where my field of expertise lay you would better understand why my apparent grasp of the detail seems incredible. But that is privileged information.

So answer the allegations. And stick to the happenings on this forum when addressing Ferrant's claims you say are false allegations.

 

[jmontecillo01]

Myth Buster,

I had a posting for you a while back wherein I had some questions. Unfortunately, it was moved to another thread so I assume that you did not see it.

How many more times do I have to say that Sean Manchester is NOT posting here?

I an just wondering how Mr Manchester found out about this site, and asked the posting involving him be deleted.

Darat believes I am "affiliated" to Manchester and his organisations. By my understanding of what that means, I am not, but by the looser understanding of what that means I am "connected" to both Manchester and his organisations. How else could I have researched as much as I have done? But that is not all I am "connected" to for the purpose of research.

Catherine and Barbara started posting on 7/January. Your first post was 14/January. What brought you to this site and how did you find it.

Does any of this matter? Why have those possibly affiliated to Farrant not been cross-examined in a similar way and threatened with a ban by Darat? They have made many personal insults and posted violations after a moderator's warning not to pursue the falsehood that I am Manchester.

Because they did not hide the fact that they knew Mr Farrant?

 

[Darat]

Posted in the Public Notices section:

Myth Buster has been banned.

Since this is quite an unusual banning some further details.

There has been some recent discussion in the " General Skepticism and The Paranormal" section regarding someone called "Sean Manchester" (see: "Sean Manchester - Vampire Hunter") who has over many decades made claims regarding the existence of actual supernatural vampires and their activities.

This seems to have attracted the attention of a few new Members, who started to make posts about the various claims. To cut a very long story short it appears that there is a personal feud between a person called David Farrant and Sean Manchester that this has been going on for decades. Both of them and their supporters have over the years taken their personal feud into many, many places on the Internet.

Having realised this I am as certain as I can be that there would be no resolution of a decade spanning feud on this Forum and having seen the disruption it has caused on other Forums, Blogs and so on I was determined not to allow it to spill over onto the JREF Forum and cause similar disruption here.

Therefore in an attempt to stem any possible disruption I issued two warnings, the second also included a clear and straightforward penalty for ignoring the warning:

http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/showthread.php?postid=2261270#post2261270

Myth Buster, Catherine & Barbara - this ends now.

You are welcome to discuss and post all you want regarding the various claims and actions of deluded people like Sean Manchester and David Farrant that are appropriate for this Forum. In other words ludicrous claims that vampires exist, that people have killed vampires and so on. However your personal stuff - take it elsewhere or face being banned.

Replying to this modbox in thread will be off topic  Posted By: Darat

http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/showthread.php?postid=2261278#post2261278

Since this is an long ongoing matter - seeming of 30 years duration - I am not naive to think that it will be resolved here between the personal acquaintances of Manchester and Farrant (Catherine/Barbara or Myth Buster). Therefore any post by them that breaches my warning will just be deleted, a warning issued, 3 such deletions will result in a ban.

Replying to this modbox in thread will be off topic  Posted By: Darat

Unfortunately Myth Buster ignored my warnings and continued to try and post about their feud therefore after issuing two final warnings the third breach has resulted in a ban.

A final point - Myth Buster was either Sean Manchester or a close personal and/or business acquaintance of Sean Manchester.

Any comments etc. regarding this matter should be made in the Forum Management section.

 

[Ducky]

Wonder how long until Manchester himself either shows up or emails threatening action. Oh well.

Moving on, Mr Ferrant, since you have been cordial (and I thank you for this) and have been upfront about who you are and what you believe, I hope you will stay and discuss things with us in the thread for you, or wherever you rightly please. I look forward to talking with you further.

 

[brodski]

How many more times do I have to say that Sean Manchester is NOT posting here?

Darat believes I am "affiliated" to Manchester and his organisations. By my understanding of what that means, I am not, but by the looser understanding of what that means I am "connected" to both Manchester and his organisations. How else could I have researched as much as I have done? But that is not all I am "connected" to for the purpose of research.

Does any of this matter? Why have those possibly affiliated to Farrant not been cross-examined in a similar way and threatened with a ban by Darat? They have made many personal insults and posted violations after a moderator's warning not to pursue the falsehood that I am Manchester.

We know who is "affiliated with Farrant", Catherine, and greenwych have been very open about the fact that they are in "David's camp" and David posts here under his own name, this means that when we read their posts we know where they are coming from.
You on the other hand are claiming some kind of laughable "neutral" status, yet you seem to have intimate details of both the feud and of the thoughts, feelings and intentions of Sean himself.

If you like I can ask similar questions of Catherine and Greenwych , but it would be a waste of time as they are perfectly open about the answers

You have alleged in other posts that The Vampire is somehow part of "David's camp" (and that she in connected with David just as strongly as you are connected with Sean), well those of us that followed this on her blog know that her contact with David and pals happened after Manchester started abusing her electronically.
From correspondence with the vampire and her posts hear I know that she finds supernatural claims made by both David and Sean bizarre and hard to believe, but David's camp have been open with information and receptive to questioning. Sean ahs been nothing but a bully. And if we are to believe Sean's ramblings, he is the victim of a vast, international conspiracy of people who where previously unconnected until they decide to attack him for no reasons, forcing him to threaten them and their ISPs with legal action. A story which just doesn’t add up. Given that Sean has also demanded that all discussion of him ceases here, the story of Seans opponents relating to how he conducts himself is very, very believable.

As to the threats of banning, Catherine Greenwich and David have been threatened with a ban, just as you have, if you try to sue this forum to continue a 30 year feud. Greenwych has had at least one of her posts deleted for breaching this warning, and if she (or anyone involved in this topic) has 3 posts deleted for breaching Darat's warning, she will be banned.
The difference between you and Catherine David and greenwych is that they know how to be civil and take heed or warnings, you seem to lack both of these qualities- which will likely get you banned from here in the near future.

You know something Buster, your posting here has achieved something quiet remarkable, by showing yourself to be a rude, lying and ill-informed bully you have actually managed to get a self professed Psychic Investigator the sympathy and support of a board of die hard Skeptics.
Have a think about that, and see if you can work out why that happened without appeal to some conspiracy or other.

 

[Ducky]

The difference between you and Catherine David and greenwych is that they know how to be civil and take heed or warnings, you seem to lack both of these qualities- which will likely get you banned from here in the near future.

You know something Buster, your posting here has achieved something quiet remarkable, by showing yourself to be a rude, lying and ill-informed bully you have actually managed to get a self professed Psychic Investigator the sympathy and support of a board of die hard Skeptics.
Have a think about that, and see if you can work out why that happened without appeal to some conspiracy or other.

Psst: Brodski, great post. But he *was* banned.

Also the paragraph I quoted makes me giggle. Good form

 

[Cuddles]

which will likely get you banned from here in the near future.

And we are left to wonder, is Brodski actually psychic and typed this before Darat's post? Is Brodski involved in a cunning plot to convince us he is psychic by pretending he hadn't seen Darat's post? Are the spirits playing a cruel trick on him by making him think he is having precognitions when they are actually showing him visions of the past? Is this some huge consiparcy to distract us from the true threat that will only become apparent after Brodski reveals himself to be both Manchester, Farrant, a vampire and a small duck from Glasgow?