Tuesday, 20 March 2012


Allegations ghost-written by Beverley Mason (aka "Raggety") with Kevin Chesham's full approval and collaboration, begin: "A cursory glance at the ‘About Kev’ section of this blog  reveals that Kev has led quite an extraordinary life." Is that really true? The Oxford Dictionary defines "extraordinary" as meaning "very unusual or remarkable." Has Kevin's life been very unusual or remarkable? Compared with others, I would say not. In one sense, of course, everyone's life is remarkable, but that is not what is meant when the term is attributed to an individual who worked most of his life for local borough pool establishments and leisure complexes when not running, cycling or swimming for his own pleasure. The only aspect I find truly extraordinary is Kevin's capacity to bear false witness against someone he has known, on and off, for a great many years whom he allowed to play host to him and his wife before colluding in a  hate campaign with that person's absolute worst enemy. This, I confess, I and others find most extraordinary.

Next we are told: "Kev offers up to the reader an unselfconscious portrait of not only his physical, but his spiritual development as he looks back over the trials and tribulations which made him who he is today." I feel we have touched on his physical accomplishments enough, ie how he seemingly miraculously ballooned into a hulk eating forty eggs and half a dozen chickens per day from what was previously a slight figure, and reverted back again to being the runt of the litter. But what is this about his "spiritual development"? He has called himself a Buddhist for as long as I have known him. Calling yourself a Buddhist and being a Buddhist, however, are two different things. In my experience, Kevin knows next to nothing about Buddhism, does not practice its philosophy, which advocates spiritual contemplation for the attainment of perfect peace, and has never been known to meditate. The Buddha discouraged his followers from indulging in disputation for its own sake, which is fruitless. What is Kevin engaing in now but a fruitless disputation? How does his transformation into someone who turned on his friends to attempt to place them in danger equate with karmic law? He could be a masochist, of course, but this is not Buddhism. It has been suggested by at least two people who have known him that he is a masochist, and that this flawed side of his character explains why he likes to turn people against him, eg I don't know of a single person with whom we were mutually acquainted in the 1970s who now wants anything to do with him.

We then read: "He decided that he would like to preview one of the most perplexing situations that he felt should be put into print. It describes the formation and dissolution of a friendship of nearly 40 years, and how Kev came to the conclusion that his ultimate loyalty must needs be to his own conscience – despite the attempts of others to silence him." The friendship, such as it was, had lasted thirty-three years when Kevin behaved in an obviously unacceptable manner. We were wary of his suspicious behaviour from that point onward. Three years later he was found to be openly consorting with David Farrant which sinister collaboration eventually led to him trying to cause as much damage as possible and put my wife and I in personal danger. Yet the only person he has really harmed is himself. Quite what attempts have been made to "silence" Kevin are not known or identified. This simply did not happen.

From this point the allegations made by Kevin via his wife become even more preposterous and sinister. To go through each and every one of them would be tedious in the extreme, but, contrary to their claims, I did not go back to an employment which belonged not to me but to a mutual acquaintance called Tony Hill; I was not "sacked" from anywhere; I was not told by police to desist from taking photographs in Holloway Road, and Kevin did not find me employment at Hornsey Road swimming pool. These and the increasingly absurd claims that follow are an absolute tissue of lies which Kevin and Beverley no doubt find humurous to share with others, but more reflect their own undeveloped minds and unspiritual state. When we read Kevin quoted as saying "If I was not training hard enough he used to shout 'Schnell, schnell ...dummkopfen English, eggs and bacon Englishman,' and when he really got angry...'You vill be shot at dawn'," we start to see Farrant's hand in these asinine allegations. What Kevin has overlooked is that others were on the running team and they saw and heard nothing vaguely similar to what is being attributed to me. What I find truly extraordinary is that anyone would take any of this nonsense seriously. Needless to say, I was not the team coach, as also claimed, and was taking part as a personal quest to keep fit. There was no coach.

Things start to get really nasty with Kevin quoted as saying: "I was later to learn that in the late 1960s Sean had canvassed for the National Front although he did not disclose this to me at the time." Left out of the allegation is that Kevin was told this piece of garbage by David Farrant who has repeated the unsubstantiated lie many times without offering a single shred of evidence. Anyone belonging to such an organisation would appear on its membership list. I do not despite Farrant falsely claiming otherwise.

The letter, below, attacking the National Front appeared in a newspaper in the late 1960s. I was its author.

I have always opposed bigotry and ultra-nationalism such as evinced by those who hate other races for no other reason than they belong to that race. Not every single person in such a party is necessarily a racial bigot, but many are, which I personally find unaccepatble. I love people of all races and enjoy the diversity of mankind. I also want to preserve and protect my own culture and heritage, not least its Faith. If that makes me vaguely nationalistic, so be it. Farrant, curiously enough, stood on a "Wiccans Awake!" platform as a "Wicca Workers Party" candidate in the 1978 General Election, but was thwarted by the fact he has criminal convictions and served a term of imprisonment, having been sentenced to four years and eight months. He transferred his support to the National Front with whom he had previously been in communication. Farrant's friend and collaborator was John Pope (pictured below, right). Pope's uncle, Tony Binding, was a prospective parliamentary candidate for the BNP. Pope wrote articles for the National Front.

It should also be remembered that Kevin and Beverley claimed to me, my wife and other guests that they are members of the BNP. Their views were hardly a secret. Hence when mutual friends toasted absent friends at reunion dinners that did not include the couple they would mockingly raise their arm, not their glass, in a Fascist salute before bursting out with laughter. Kevin was held in such low esteem by everyone toward the end. He became, much the same as Farrant, something of a pathetic joke by those who personally knew him. In the meantime, Kevin Chesham is not averse to giving a Fascist salute for real.

The claim that Kevin "eventually agreed to become executor of Sean’s Will" beggars belief. A more unlikely candidate is difficult to imagine. He most definitely was not the executor of my Last Will and Testament. Neither was he my "best man," as also claimed. He did not even attend our wedding ceremony. That notwithstanding, far from being executor to my Will, Kevin bequeathed his entire estate to our Church:

Having become David Farrant's parrot, it was no surprise to read: "Sean’s church only seemed to consist of himself, his wife, and no more than three or four friends (including myself, apparently, who he began referring to inexplicably as Br Kevin). There were no priests, no congregation, there was no church building, and I certainly have never heard Sean refer to having more than one property." Kevin is not a Christian, and neither is his wife. When friends spoke about Christianity to him, as did Keith Maclean on more than one occasion because of the New Age occultism Kevin indulged in, he and Beverley became openly hostile and left early. On one occasion they moved their chairs into the garden, taking leave of everyone remaining in the sun lounge where coffee was being served. Then they departed prematurely. I have never discussed with Kevin or his wife anything about our Church, its congregation, or any properties associated with it. Due to the abnormal level of perpetual interest shown by Kevin and Beverley toward our future whereabouts since their return from New Zealand, we have been extremely circumspect in what we have shared and informed them about. They knew about our viewing properties in Glastonbury, but they were not given an address. I have called most of my friends "brother" or "sister" for as long as I can remember, as is common among Christians whether the person being addressed is Christian or not, and Kevin did the same from 1973. His correspondence to people generally used this title and he invariably always signed off as "Brother Kevin" for reasons best known to himself.

Kevin is next quoted as saying: "He was certainly irritable, and I remember him saying that he could not wait to get out of the place, as he despised Glastonbury, and considered it to be overrun with ‘quasi-religious fakes’. The irony was lost on me at the time – it is not now.  His only concern was to get the photos taken ‘for the record’, and get back to Bournemouth as soon as possible – in fact he ruined what could have been a pleasant day out." It would have been difficult to "get back to Bournemouth" because the only only occasion we visited Glastonbury with Kevin was in June 1993 and at that time we were living on the outskirts of north London, approximately one hundred and twenty miles from Bournemouth! As my wife and I noted, Kevin was incredibly irritable throughout the visit and wanted to leave early when we suggested taking him to the High Street where St John's Church is situated. It was perfectly obvious to us that Kevin hated the place, which in view of what we now know does not surprise me. Though we rightly or wrongly attributed his extreme irritability to steroid use for body-building purposes, upon reflection it might be the fact that Glastonbury is the most sacred and spiritual place in all of Britain.

Things take on an element of pure farce when Kevin alleges: "Sean’s enmity towards David had been known to me for some time – actually it was impossible not to be aware of it. When David’s name came up in conversation (which it frequently did – often encouraged by ‘Eggmanne’) he would thump the table with his fist, and shout that Farrant was a Satanist, an ex-felon, and various expletives not fit for publication. When he flew into these rages, everyone knew better than to challenge or interrupt him, including his wife, who was obviously mortified by these outbursts in front of guests and just seemed to want a quiet life." I am described as a Hitler stereotype, thumping the table with my fist, by Kevin who employs David Farrant's odd spelling for the pseudonym "Eggman" given Tony Hill in the 1960s, ie "Eggmanne." It cannot be disputed that Farrant is "an ex-felon" or that he cultivated an image in the 1970s where he wanted people to believe he was a Satanist. In a recorded interview from 1977, he can be heard saying that "most people" would view him as "a Satanist." I believe that all David Farrant's pretensions of witchcraft, wicca, necromancy and diabolism are bogus and that the only genuine aspect is that from the very first he was and still remains a self-aggrandising publicity-seeker. That is not to say that his theatrical dabblings in things he does not understand or believe in have not opened him to spiritual contamination and degradation.

Far from being "mortified" by anything concerning Farrant, whom I advise people to ignore unless they feel threatened, my wife, among others, swore out a police complaint against this man in 2002 under the Protection from Harassment Act. The irony in all this is that nobody I know has ever displayed more enmity and interest in David Farrant than has Kevin Chesham who wanted to talk about him at every opportunity. In this endeavour he was found to be increasingly unsuccessful. Even Beverley Mason in latter years tried to get my wife alone to quiz her about this unsavoury character. My wife merely referred Beverley to me, but she knew better than to ask me because I am really not interested in discussing Farrant with anyone. It was Kevin who was always bringing malicious material on the internet to our attention; material which originated with Farrant or a miscreant doing his dirty work. Now Kevin has become one of those miscreants himself.

Kevin's fabrications become yet more absurd, as he claims: "I am in essence a pacifist, and do not condone violence, which I consider to be the hallmark of an uncivilised society, unless absolutely necessary. ... Sean knew that I was a First Dan in karate, and during his ravings about David would regularly stress the importance of ‘loyalty to the cause,’ and that ‘something must be done about him’. I felt extremely uncomfortable about what unequivocally equated to a tacit suggestion that I cause David actual, if not grievous bodily harm." Against this raving nonsense we must examine what Kevin, who used to be a night club bouncer and about as far removed from being a  "pacifist" as anyone can get, wrote to Keith Maclean two years after the last time I or any of our mutual acquaintances saw him:

"Do you remember David Farrant had found my address from the excommunicated Illtyd Thomas? At the time I was concerned as dear Sean and his wife had suffered years of abuse from him. Well, I started to receive self-produced booklets from this person. The first was on its own without anything accompanying it. It was a book of lies about Sean who has suffered the slings and arrows of this man for so long. But why send it to me? He has been sending me things for months while I have been abroad. Then I started to receive emails from the 'British Psychic and Occult Society' which turns out to be David Farrant again. Polite, not abusive, asking me if I would like to join. Can you believe this Keith? He has the utter cheek to email a stranger to ask me to join! The connection with Sean has made me a target. I did not get concerned as Sean and his wife have endured this for so long themselves. I replied to Farrant's email in polite and non-abusive terms that I was interested to know why the 'BPOS' thought I would consider joining? No reply was forthcoming. Then another envelope arrived from North London but with the SW14 postmark on it. It contained another booklet called 'Bishop Bonkers,' a crude attempt to attack Sean again. Plus I was receiving more emails. I asked via email how he had found my email address but again no reply was forthcoming. Now I was angry. It was my intention to teach this bunch a severe lesson. They had attacked Sean once too often. It was not me I was concerned about but to track down me, my address, my email, just to attack Sean - something was going to be done. I emailed Sean and he pointed out no contact would always be best. I have emailed Sean to assure him I will no longer reply to anything from this bunch or, more accurately, from Farrant. I received several emails (still getting them). One invited me to a 'meeting' at a library in North London. It was my plan to go, but now I admit to you with a red face and somewhat humble that I intended to go and if just one word of ill was spoken about Sean I fully intended to knock so much sense into their heads I would have been arrested. This I now know Sean sensed and was correct of course to warn me not to have contact. I feel grateful because the last thing I would want would be to cause Sean trouble. Also it is not to my credit that this was my intention. My only defence is I hoped that my actions would stop the terrible attacks on Sean. All thanks to him for his intervention."

Here are the relevant passages from the actual letter of 14 December 2009 in Kevin's own handwriting:

"I do remember," claims Kevin on his hate blog, "that often, just when the conversation was being diverted away, he would find some reason to slip in one of his favourite Goebbels quotes; that is: 'If you tell a big enough lie and keep repeating it, people will eventually come to believe it'."

Far from it being a "favourite quote" of mine, it was actually a quote used by Kevin Chesham in correspodence to Keith Maclean:

One of the most astonishing tirades with David Farrant's fingerprints all over it, aptly following on from what had been written to Keith, is the stream of malicious fabrication from Kevin Chesham that alleges:

"I remember one occasion when Sean laughingly waved a piece of paper at me, which he kept beside the computer in the front room. He boasted about the list of aliases inscribed upon it, and how he used them regularly in a form of cyber warfare, in that, as he described it, he would search the internet for any forum which mentioned himself, David Farrant, or the Highgate Vampire. His modus operandi as he described it was to create an argument, then argue against it under up to 4 or 5  aliases until the conversation got so heated that the forum was closed down. He bragged that he had had ‘many successes’, especially when he used the ‘incitement to religious hatred card’ as he laughingly referred to it. Sean’s justification for complaining to all internet forums where David Farrant’s opinions about the supposed ‘Highgate Vampire’ were freely admitted, was framed in the words of Adolf Hitler: ‘As soon as by one's own propaganda even a glimpse of right on the other side is admitted, the cause for doubting one's own right is laid.’  I remember this was another favourite quote of his. I found all this astonishing, especially as I am someone who lives an outdoors, physically active life, and could not imagine the extremity of mental disturbance that would lead him to behave in such a way. My perplexity and concern that all was not well was exacerbated when my wife told me, on our way home one day, that Sarah had confided in her that Sean spent so many hours stalking people on the internet that he had ceased taking his meals with her some years ago, preferring to take them alone at the computer."

Not a single word of the above paragraph is true. I do not have a computer in a front room. Kevin and Beverley seem to forget that there were always other people present who are witness to the fact that these claims are completely false. The computer occasionally used by my wife and I at our retreat is in the study on the first floor. No conversation took place between me and Kevin, or between my wife and Beverley, as described. These are vile falsehoods, and the fact that they are willing to use my wife in this way to further their perverse vendetta is despicable. Given that they were making secret recordings of conversations of my wife and I on at least the last two visits (and possibly on more occasions) it should not be too difficult for them to establish their claim. Yet they will not be able to do so because they are lying. My wife and I invariably eat all our meals together, and never in a study. I do not stalk people, but have been stalked by that clique who cling to a man who was jailed for making black magic threats, vandalism and desecration, a man, moreover, against whom my wife and I, along with others, have filed official police complaints. As for the Hitler quote, I was not even aware of it until I read it in Kevin's personal attack on me. He is clearly very familiar with quotes attributed to Hitler and Goebbels, which makes sense in view of his association in recent times with the neo-Nazi-Satanist Kerry Bolton on whose instructions I suspect he initially turned against me. Farrant lacks the intelligence of someone like Bolton, but morally and intellectually matches Kevin and, coupled with their obvious craving for public recognition of some sort, find in each other strange bedfellows fighting a common cause, ie pursuing a hate campaign with malice aforethought to cause harm to me specifically and anyone close to me. Reading Kevin Chesham's string of untruths about me is no different to anything David Farrant has to say, and I can see that much of it is spoon-fed by Farrant to Kevin who developed a taste for poison soon after his discovery of Kerry Bolton.

Kevin at this point launches into what he believes to be his coup de grâce:

"I think in retrospect, the climax came in 2007, when Bev and I were again visiting Sean for Christmas dinner. It was on this occasion that I gleaned something of the exact nature of ‘the cause’ with which Sean so frequently peppered his rhetoric. Many photographs were taken of everyone present around the dinner table downstairs. But I was rather surprised when Sean later invited Bev and myself, accompanied by Sarah, to visit a locked room upstairs. I had heard mention of this ‘secret room’ in the past, but this was the first time I was to see it in person."

No room is locked, which is why Beverley was able to sneak upstairs on the pretext of using the lavatory (when she could have used the downstairs one) to take clandestine photographs of her own. Did she find any room locked? No, of course not. Also, the room about which Kevin speaks that contained militaria from the first and second world wars is one he had entered many times prior, as witnessed by others present. And if he had "heard mention" of a locked, secret room in the past, who did he hear it from? He does not and cannot identify his "source" because it simply does not exist. There never has been a locked, secret room.

Kevin rounds off his false allegations with the following:

"Sean  instructed Sarah to start taking photographs of him and myself together, with his nazi paraphernalia in the background.  I was caught off guard and played along, but I caught Bev’s eye – and my wife is no dupe, although I am afraid that even then it was only just dawning on me that that is exactly how my friend of several decades clearly saw me. Bev immediately took out her own camera and started snapping away. The glances between Sean and Sarah at this point really said it all – the whole situation had been staged by them."

Kevin's sheer paranoia overlooks the fact that photographs were also taken in the reception room, dining area and other rooms. There was nothing special about the room containing militaria other than it was always of interest to Kevin who had contributed some of the items contained within it, chiefly books and pamphlets about the Third Reich and the British Union of Fascists. We had absolutely no problem with Beverley taking photographs. This was something she did in some of the other rooms, which makes it all the more bizarre that she would secretly take pictures on her own on the pretext of using the lavatory. She obviously thought she would find something that would be of use to Kerry Bolton, eg evidence that I was working undercover etc, but there was nothing for her to find because all I was doing was displaying items I was trading and had no interest in any of their political shenanigans. It is they who told us they belonged to the British National Party, not the other way around. If I did not want to be photographed alongside Kevin in a room containing ceremonial WWII swords and such like I would have moved away, or I would have asked Beverley not to take any pictures. But I did not mind in the slightest. That she furtively took photographs of curios and even certain items given me by Kevin betrays a maladjusted mind. And if Kevin was so shocked by what he describes as "Nazi paraphernalia" witnessed in December 2007, why was he not similarly shocked on all the previous occasions when he posed and puffed his chest out with pride alongside German Third Reich eagles, Wehrmacht belts with buckles, and Luftwaffe ceremonial daggers and swords? The picture of him below with those very items was taken in 2003  over four years before his final visit at the end of 2007 when he supposedly discovered a "secret room" full of "Nazi paraphernalia." Kevin Chesham's claims are disingenuous from start to finish. They reflect a disturbed and deceitful mind, and I obviously regret the day I ever met him. The same goes for Beverley Mason whom I believe to be the driving force and malificent intelligence behind her husband's  hostile impulse and deep-seated desire to inflict serious harm on people who have only shown each of them kindness and consideration.

Ironically, Beverley Mason once wrote: "Seán Manchester is someone I have been acquainted with for some years. He possesses an inner serenity which has a soothing effect on all around him, as well as a deep passion for the ideals he holds close. He has a drive which governs his actions, and it is a drive for the forces of good over evil. He also has a sincere purity of heart." What happened to lure them to support the forces of evil remain speculative for the most part, but the fact that they were lured and did succumb is clear.

[Kevin Chesham's false allegations continue to be addressed on the next blog . . .]

No comments:

Post a Comment

Note: only a member of this blog may post a comment.