Friday, 30 November 2012

Anthony Hogg


Anthony Hogg

"It’s not like I’m turning up at his house, peering over the fence." - Anthony Hogg (30 April 2014)

Anthony Hogg is an unemployed man, born in the 1980s, and a resident of Melbourne, Victoria, Australia, who has been stalking and harassing anyone sympathetic or somehow connected to the author and exorcist Bishop Seán Manchester, including the Bishop himself, for a decade. Hogg compulsively posts abusive and derogatory statements and allegations about this person on the internet.  His theme is always the same. He appears to many outsiders as a totally manic individual who has an unhealthy obsession with Bishop Seán Manchester and events surrounding a supernatural case about which the Bishop wrote a very succesful book in the previous century. The case itself occurred on the other side of the world to where Hogg lives and long before he was born. Anthony Hogg has not been within a thousand miles of the UK or indeed Europe.

Bishop Seán Manchester was a public figure throughout the latter half of the twentieth century, but nowadays considers himself very much a private individual. He obviously has his critics — what ardent believer does not? — but there is a difference between a critic and a troll.

Hogg is a troll.


Anthony Hogg claims "the photo accompanying the [Hoggwatch] blog [shown above] is thankfully incorrect," ie chosen to represent him at random and therefore false. This, like much else of what he says, is a lie. The photograph correctly identifying him was found on his Microsoft messenger profile where he put it. Those receiving messages from the same Anthony Hogg who stalks Bishop Seán Manchester saw it.

Hogg's principal blog was disabled by WordPress for repeated offences that included defamation and illegally infringing Bishop Seán Manchester's lawfully owned copyright material. Such violations occured on multiple occasions over a number of years. He has now turned to other services to continue his trolling. On one of his alternate blogs (http://www.parafort.com/dawwih/) he uploaded most of what was on his suspended WordPress blog, minus the infringed images which he could not access. That did not stop him uploading freshly stolen images. Hogg deviously registered this new blog in the name of UK resident Trystan Lewis Swale, an atheist who likes to attack those who hold religious and particularly supernatural beliefs. Swale has conspired with an infamous figure convicted of satanic crimes to try to discredit Bishop Seán Manchester on his hostile podcasts. He continues to this day to post extremely abusive and derogatory remarks about the Bishop on Facebook and elsewhere. Anthony Hogg (who has never been to the UK) arranged to have his blog registered using a British-based Server (UK Web Solutions Direct) in the name of Trystan Swale of Cheltenham, Gloucestershire, England. Swale describes himself as a "paranormal and Fortean investigator," but in reality is a hardened sceptic who dismisses the paranormal out-of-hand and derides anyone who does not. This replacement blog lasted a matter of days due to Hogg and Swale refusing to remove two stolen images of Bishop Manchester (taken long before either of them were born) and being unable to prove, as they had falsely claimed, that the pictures were their own copyright.

Soon after the replacement blog was disabled, Trystan Swale posted the following comment on Facebook:

"Some of you may notice that the DAWWIH archive will be disappearing soon, if it hasn't already gone. A Mr [sic] Manchester has slapped a DMCA notice on me. My web host has acted upon this without proof of any copyright ownership from Manchester. This is despite DMCA notices not having any binding legality in the UK and despite dispute over the legal status of the content concerned. My hosts have advised they will act upon Manchester's claim, albeit in the absence of any evidence supporting him. I was told that regardless of my legal position I will be required to demonstrate that Manchester is not the copyright holder. Consequently I am in the process of switching hosts."
.
The proof of Bishop Manchester's ownership exists in the form of his possession of the 35mm negatives and the fact that when these two pictures were published in the 1970s they were shown to be his exclusive copyright. There is also the small matter of neither Trystan Swale or Anthony Hogg having been born when the pictures in question were taken. Swale speaks as if there is no copyright law in the United Kingdom, There is, of course, but what was glaringly obvious to his Web Host and Server is that he did not own copyright of what was in dispute and had placed alongside the photographs misleading material, ie the words "Black Magic" emblazoned in letters as big as the pictures themselves, plus further images of a man convicted of satanic crimes at Highgate Cemetery in 1974. One of these images was used as evidence to convict him. The inference is clear, and such juxtaposing is a familar strategy of these two antagonistic stalkers of Bishop Seán Manchester.

Trystan Swale and Anthony Hogg somehow feel they have the right to steal photographs exclusively owned by Bishop Seán Manchester and illegally publish them to incite hatred using false and derogatory attributions. And if the Bishop dares to recover his own property by issuing a legal take-down notice these two malcontents consider it to be "harassment." Such is the behaviour of mindless trolls who are obsessed with someone they do not know, have never met and have never spoken to.

Anthony Hogg has adopted a variety of pseudonyms in the past, including The Inquisitive One, The Overseer, Amateur Vampirolgist and tnuocalucard ("Count Dracula" spelt backwards). These days he is arrogant enough to use his real name, but he goes to considerable lengths to protect his exact whereabouts to prevent prosecution for stalking, harassment and inciting hatred against a public figure. Hogg has gone so far as to publish a UK address in full (offered specifically for people wanting to receive signed and dedicated copies of the Bishop's books). The excuse given is that he found it on the internet. His dissemination of the address was not an act of benevolence, however, because it appeared in the context of a stream of vitriol and malicious allegations against the person with whom the address is associated.

A typical example of the exceptionally offensive manner in which the self-styled "Baptist" Hogg hypocritically and abusively refers to Bishop Seán Manchester comes from his recently disabled blog:
.
"I'm not going to disclose the identity of this potty prelate, wanker, total cock and blatant hypocrite. On an unrelated note, in the lead up to my blog's closure, I was subjected to repeated DMCA takedown notices issued by Sean Manchester."

Unsurprisingly, the blog on which Anthony Hogg posted the foul-mouthed comments was suspended. Within days he had transferred this profanity, word for word, to yet another blog where it still remains.

Bishop Seán Manchester only once commented on Hogg when he opined on Friday, 13 April 2012:

"Anthony Hogg (Melbourne, Australia), approximately 30 years of age, unmarried, not in a relationship, liberal, modernist, claims to be a Christian (Baptist) but evinces extremely unChristian behaviour, eg profanity (I have been referred to as 'a fuckin' lowlife' by him). There is not a day that passes where Anthony Hogg is not trolling and posting harassing comments about me somewhere on the internet. This self-proclaimed Christian's cyber-friends are either immersed in witchcraft and the occult, or profess to be atheists. Constantly critical of me because I am a traditional Christian bishop, Anthony Hogg himself remains totally anonymous — always wearing a demonic mask to cover his face and identity."

At a later juncture, Bishop Seán Manchester had this to say about Trystan Lewis Swale:

"Regarding Trystan Lewise Swale’s com­pul­sion to board the gravy train almost half a century after the events occurred by pur­chas­ing a 'Highgate Vampire' domain and at­tempt­ing to exploit what is left of the scattered dust of that par­tic­u­lar corpse, I feel re­sent­fully obliged to address par­tic­u­lar false­hoods currently being cir­cu­lated by this man on what are pre­dom­i­nantly an­tipa­thetic groups, blogs and websites.
"Swale’s rambling ob­ser­va­tions, the remainder of which I shall mostly refrain from ad­dress­ing because I ceased dis­cussing such matters three years ago, open with this statement:
I spoke to Sean Man­ches­ter on the telephone in 2012. It wasn’t intended to be a talk about Highgate, but one on the breach of copyright claim he had issued against me. True to form, he denied any knowledge of the subject, despite my webhost of the time naming Sean as the com­plainant. Amidst a lengthy verbal ramble, complete with ob­ser­va­tions on David Farrant’s personal hygiene, Sean made an in­ter­est­ing statement: "The only people who really know what happened at Highgate Cemetery were those of us who were there." I can’t disagree with him.
"We did not speak in 2012. I received an un­so­licited telephone call from Swale in 2013. My number is ex-di­rec­tory and he would have made its discovery via dubious methods.
"I treated Swale as cour­te­ously as I would treat anyone else, but I did not desire to have any con­ver­sa­tion with him and only spoke longer than I would have normally because he was about to bury his grand­fa­ther later that day. We spoke about that fact.
"We did not discuss Highgate, the su­per­nat­ural or my ministry. When he raised Highgate, as well he might have done, it is very possible I said something along the lines of what is at­trib­uted to me, ie 'The only people who really know what happened at Highgate Cemetery were those of us who were there.' That would have been ab­solutely the sum total of what I had to say on the matter.

"Farrant was in­vari­ably raised by Swale. I attempted to dispel the presumed enmity I hold for the man by offering an anecdote where I recounted how I had invited Farrant and his wife to a soirée held at a friend of mine’s North London residence. That was ap­prox­i­mately thirty years ago. I made no comment on Farrant’s personal hygiene beyond the scruffy pre­sen­ta­tion everyone who has clapped eyes on him would be more than familiar with. This was in the context of his ap­pear­ance at the afore­men­tioned event attended by forty or fifty others at a dwelling in close proximity to Creighton Avenue. My ob­ser­va­tion about Farrant and his then second wife, Colette Sully, was their anti-so­cial and non-gre­gar­i­ous behaviour. They spoke to nobody and remained in a corner drinking the sweet sherry they had brought with them. I tried to engage them and had a pho­to­graph taken with Farrant, but it was an im­pos­si­ble task.


"I added that if I ac­ci­den­tally bumped into Farrant on the street today, I would treat him in the same way I would treat anybody else and would probably offer to buy him a cup of tea.
"If Swale is now claiming that the con­ver­sa­tion was about the copyright theft of my lawfully owned material he is clearly lying. The matter, sur­pris­ingly enough, was not raised by either one of us. In normal cir­cum­stances, I would have mentioned it, but Swale was dealing with a be­reave­ment and I felt it in­ap­pro­pri­ate to engage in this matter. To now claim, as Swale is ap­par­ently doing, that I 'denied any knowledge of the subject' is extremely bizarre and certainly false. I have made several copyright claims against Swale in order to recover material he was illegally in­fring­ing. This has led to his webhost no longer wanting his custom and Swale looking elsewhere for a less dis­cern­ing server, which I un­der­stand he has now managed to achieve.
"Swale does actually manage to get one at­tri­bu­tion correct:
As of late 2013, Man­ches­ter issued a statement with­draw­ing from public life to con­cen­trate on his daily religious duties.
"I removed myself from the public hemi­sphere largely for reasons stated on my website [to view click on image of Bishop Manchester at the foot of the page], but also because of un­pro­duc­tive time-wasters like Swale and Hogg, both of whom are blocked on my server which denies them e-mail access to me. I cannot prevent intrusive and unwanted telephone calls, but these, too, are now in­ter­cepted and recorded au­to­mat­i­cally under pro­vi­sions of the Pro­tec­tion from Ha­rass­ment Act. The police are fully aware of Trystan Lewis Swale and his fel­low-trav­ellers - and the matter is in hand."


Anthony Hogg's demonic mask


Hogg's Facebook persona (Brad Pitt)

It is curious and somewhat telling that rather than use a likeness of himself, Anthony Hogg chooses an American actor as his representational image on Facebook. We could almost be forgiven for thinking he was ashamed of who he really is, ie an Australian young man of mixed race who was born at least ten years after Brad Pitt, the icon he misleadingly offers to Facebook users as himself.

Hogg finally came clean years later and admitted he had lied about the photograph he had told everyone wasn't really him. This is what he stated on one of his multifarious blogs on 30 April 2014:


Hogg finally admits this photograph is genuine!

"Ok, so I lied. Yes, it’s me. You got me there! Why did I lie? Because I wanted to protect my identity. ... Yes, I use a picture of Brad Pitt on my Facebook page, specifically a picture of him in his role as Lt. Aldo Raine in Inglourious Basterds (2009)—one of my favourite movies, by the way. Does [Bishop Manchester] honestly think I’m trying to get people to think I’m one of the most famous actors in the world? Surely he can’t be that daft. So why do I use that picture? Two reasons, actually. One, to obscure my identity. Two, what role does Pitt play in the movie? And what is [Bishop Manchester]? I’ll leave you to work that out. Suffice it to say, it’s a sly poke that’s seemingly gone over Herr Manchester’s head."

The last remark is Hogg's oft-repeated adoption of a despicable smear made by David Farrant and a latecomer to the latter's hate-fest by the name of Kevin Chesham (a man who is himself the very thing Hogg falsely alleges about Bishop Manchester) who has been colluding with the convicted felon Farrant to incite malice and cause harm. Intelligent observers see through this miserable pair of miscreants, but it suits Hogg's purpose to use Farrant's black propaganda at every available opportunity. Farrant has criminal convictions for indecency, threatening police witnesses in an attempt to pervert the course of justice, malicious vandalism, desecration involving black magic in a cemetery, possession of a handgun and ammunition, and theft of items from a hospital. Enough said.


Bishop Seán Manchester