Sharon Clarke's Voice in the Dark was published a handful of days ago by something called "CreateSpace Independent Publishing Platforms," and is described as "an in-depth look into the world of paranormal investigating centred on Northern Ireland with a mix of photographs and interviews with leading paranormal experts such as Jeff Belanger and David Farrant."
Page 27 of Ms Clarke's book describes Farrant as playing "a prominent role in the history of 20th century occultism and parapsychology and continues to do so." Such unsupported claims suggest that her interview with him was conducted impersonally, ie via the internet, and that, apart from knowing only what Farrant has told her about himself, this young authoress knows precious little about him. For example, she places the word "vampire" inside inverted commas to suggest the Highgate Vampire case should be disregarded when the only thing which deserves being disregarded is Farrant's cynical attempt to hijack it for his own publicity-seeking purposes. Furthermore, she seems oblivious to the fact that throughout most of 1970 Farrant described himself in the media as a "vampire hunter," and was arrested as same by police in Highgate Cemetery in August of that year.
He appeared on BBC television two months later, pulled a wooden stake out of the back of his trousers, brandished a large cross, and explained how he had been pursuing the legendary vampire in the graveyard. Yet in September 2007, the same David Farrant wrote: "To keep talking about ‘vampires’ when I don’t even accept their existence, is really a bit boring!" Two years earlier he stated on the James Randi forum: "I do NOT believe in vampires. I cannot say it more clearly than that." That same year on the same forum he protested: "As I have said many times before, I do not really 'believe' in anything." Farrant has nevertheless lived off his fraudulent association with the case all his adult life, ignoring the television footage, newspaper articles and images which contradict his protestations. He makes these anomalies and contradictions his means to gain interest in the media who these days never seem willing to actually pin him down and expose him as a hoaxer who keeps crying something then denies he ever believed in it. Examples include vampires, black magic curses, cat sacrifices, naked witchcraft ceremonies, summoning demons, satanic worship etc. This has been his raison d'être throughout his life, ie implicating himself in something sensational and, having achieved the publicity he hungers, explain it all away and whitewash the incident in question.
He appeared on BBC television two months later, pulled a wooden stake out of the back of his trousers, brandished a large cross, and explained how he had been pursuing the legendary vampire in the graveyard. Yet in September 2007, the same David Farrant wrote: "To keep talking about ‘vampires’ when I don’t even accept their existence, is really a bit boring!" Two years earlier he stated on the James Randi forum: "I do NOT believe in vampires. I cannot say it more clearly than that." That same year on the same forum he protested: "As I have said many times before, I do not really 'believe' in anything." Farrant has nevertheless lived off his fraudulent association with the case all his adult life, ignoring the television footage, newspaper articles and images which contradict his protestations. He makes these anomalies and contradictions his means to gain interest in the media who these days never seem willing to actually pin him down and expose him as a hoaxer who keeps crying something then denies he ever believed in it. Examples include vampires, black magic curses, cat sacrifices, naked witchcraft ceremonies, summoning demons, satanic worship etc. This has been his raison d'être throughout his life, ie implicating himself in something sensational and, having achieved the publicity he hungers, explain it all away and whitewash the incident in question.
If she had only done some proper, in-depth research and, moreover, met him, would she really describe 70-year-old Farrant as a "leading paranormal expert" who "played a prominent role" etc?
Nobody at the time took Farrant remotely seriously, and this book must run the risk of attracting some considerable criticism from the more discerning among paranormal researchers, due entirely to her reckless inclusion and promotion of this man who has caused such upset and grief to so many.
Sharon Clarke's glowing testimony and promotion of the charlatan who was charged and found guilty of many offences in the 1970s, including indecency in a churchyard, tomb desecration, cemetery vandalism, threatening witnesses with black magic, attempting to pervert the course of justice, theft from a hospital, and possession of an illegal firearm with ammunition, will win her few Brownie points.
Nobody at the time took Farrant remotely seriously, and this book must run the risk of attracting some considerable criticism from the more discerning among paranormal researchers, due entirely to her reckless inclusion and promotion of this man who has caused such upset and grief to so many.
Sharon Clarke's glowing testimony and promotion of the charlatan who was charged and found guilty of many offences in the 1970s, including indecency in a churchyard, tomb desecration, cemetery vandalism, threatening witnesses with black magic, attempting to pervert the course of justice, theft from a hospital, and possession of an illegal firearm with ammunition, will win her few Brownie points.
No comments:
Post a Comment