I said I’d write a bit about Queen’s Wood; but do you know, its one of those places that’s really difficult to describe.
It takes up a large part of Highgate, and lies opposite Highgate Wood; the two being divided by a fairly busy road. But the two Woods are entirely different in character being run or owned by two entirely different organizations (can’t remember what these are now, only I think Highgate Wood is under the control of the Council). Highgate Wood is well cared for; has specific opening times and is closed to the public by night. Queen’s Wood is left mostly unattended and is always freely accessible. Maybe this has led to an almost fearsome reputation it has earned to be avoided by night; and certainly parts of it has attracted those with ‘less savoury’ motivations.
Not so long back, it (Queen’s Wood) was the scene of a grisly murder, or maybe that should read ‘gang-land’ murder. A man was taken there and stabbed to death. His body just left amongst some foliage near a path.
But the Wood has always been associated with death, or ‘deaths’. In 1665 a part of it was used to bury victims of the Great Plague. The victims were brought out in cart-loads from the Old City of London and dumped in large pits then covered with quick-lime. The site is still appropriately named Church Yard Bottom, and is even still thus named on some maps. Perhaps not surprising, the Wood also has its own resident ghost. Said to be that of a nun who just disappears amongst the trees after being sighted, this forlorn spectre has been sighted by many people over the years. A convent in fact, once stood at the South end of the old boundary, though of this, now there remains no trace.
I have already mentioned the old paddling pool where I sat only recently. Well only some 40 yards or so away from this at a ‘dip’ in the Wood was the ‘dogs swimming pool’ (as it was known) – a place where dogs could splash away in the water to wash any mud on them after being walked. Not a bad idea really, I suppose, but I believe nowadays, it too, is empty.
My personal memories of this old Wood are quite varied. We used to play games like ‘hide-and-seek’ amongst its trees and bushes as children; and I remember going there on nature rambles from my first school which was in nearby Shepherds Hill. We would collect new buds and take these back to watch these ‘grow’ in the classroom; and not infrequently did we find hedgehogs and see many rare birds there.
I remember once finding a chaffinch’s nest hidden in a hawthorn bush at the side of a pathway. I was alone on that occasion and saw the mother sitting bravely on the nest. I remember making many visits to the nest to wait for the eggs to hatch, but I was always careful not to disturb the foliage or the mother. But she was quite safe. The nest was well hidden and I had only found after seeing the male bird fly in there.
Well, that’s a very brief summary of forlorn Queen’s Wood. It has changed little over the years, but I wouldn’t advise anybody to venture in there at night!
What other news? Well, I told you the new book is finished – text-wise at least. Well, I have now been getting reports about it from people who have been reading my Blog and apparently been reading other peoples’ Blogs with all the usual untruth’s and nonsense about myself. People here will know well who the culprits are their motivation . . . well, you know, I’m really not too sure of the true motivation. One of them is clearly ‘bonkers’, so nothing new there! The other seems to be a neurotic female who is so obsessed with myself that she just has to keep writing about me.
I have made it quite clear here on numerous occasions, that I just don’t want to discuss these people – and I do NOT! This does not appear to deter them as they apparently just go on writing about, or discussing, myself.
I do not really take too much notice of that either. But I do mind when one of them is suggesting that the purpose of my new book – or one of its purposes – is to hurt two innocent people’ (their words, not mine). To set the record straight, I have not repeated the allegations made against these two people by one of the people concerned. Its not that I doubt that these original allegations were made (indeed, these were told to two independent people) but I DO believe such allegations were untrue, and it would not be my place to subject other innocent people to their implications.
In fact, I had already written to one of the people concerned in 2007, but this was about an entirely different matter which he dealt with accordingly. My letter to this person I have published; as indeed, letters I wrote to parents concerned and to a solicitor. These letters were submitted to investigating authorities at the time, as they addressed untruthful allegations then being made about me: and which were subsequently proved to have been untrue.
I am not in the business of ‘hurting’ anybody. But when certain other people set out to hurt myself and other innocent people, I am quite entitled to deal with such allegations in the same manner as these were made i.e. in public. This I have done, nothing less, but nothing more. As an author, I can only present the facts and people can then be left to judge for themselves. So, just to clear that up!
Actually, on another matter, there are some rather interesting stories about the ghostly nun that haunts Queen’s Wood. I wrote many of these down years ago but have to admit, I have forgotten many. I will try and find them and share a few here (if I can find them!).
But for the moment,
Yes you’re right L; as a matter of fact, I can’t make head nor tail of it either! But thanks for not posting on there anyway. It would serve little purpose anyway as that person is just incapable of telling the truth (apart from which I don’t really want to be ‘caught in the middle of it’ and which was why I thought it better not to allow you’re query here which would only be ‘jumped upon’ by others had I not done so. This has happened before, and I really don’t want the same thing happening again).
But I will nevertheless answer you about the ‘parents letter’. You asked a perfectly valid question, and you are entitled to a truthful response.
The letter was dated August 19th 2007 and sent by Certified post. A copy of this letter was on my computer (as copies of most letters were) and was later examined for accuracy. The person is now trying to claim that this letter was never received. There can only be one of two reasons for this : 1) either the person wasn’t told about it (which seems hard to believe) or 2) the letter was somehow ‘intercepted’ after it had reached the address. Whatever, it really makes little difference. The recipients will get to see it again as I have re-produced this letter in its entirety in the new book I have also re-produced other letters (including another of mine to a solicitor) which totally disprove lies being told about the situation in the present time.
This letter, in fact, quoted statements which the person themselves had published on the Internet including their intentions to ‘write a book’ about myself based upon gross untruths given to them by another person.
The book will, I hope, clarify all such matters – which is the main reason I had to publish it.
But please L, lets not continue this matter here. I hate having to delete posts but at least I hope you can understand why. But at least I have answered you, without giving others the chance to ‘start all the nonsense’ again. Basically, I have clarified everything in the book, and do not wish to debate it here.
If those people remained obsessed with myself, it really remains their own problem.
If you have anymore queries about these events, please send me a private message here. Just mark it ‘private’ so I can know its not meant for publication.
I hope your own ‘family matter’ works out OK anyway and you get the money owed.
You must give me a land address in the future and I’ll send a copy of the new book to you following its release.
For the moment,
I know it was a couple of ‘final questions’, but I really cannot allow this post either. I did not mean to mislead you the first time. I have not deleted your posts but saved them, only I just don’t want the subject to be introduced here.
I KNOW you are being serious and objective. I would have not even answered you if I thought otherwise. THAT is not the issue. It is giving people a platform here that I really don’t want again i.e. to bring frivolous issues into play which have no bearing on the real subject matter. (Now get that Cat, Craig and some others, this ain’t a frivolous Facebook Blog!).
OK L. You asked why my new book could be ‘illegal’. Well it isn’t, but as advanced speculative lies are being assumed about it, I will say this (but then ask me about something else I have written – ghosts in Queen’s Wood . . . anything!).
First, I never said the person concerned had a ‘snogging session’ in any Woods. That was my own terminology, I admit. But I was only describing an event (in my own way) that had been told to somebody else by another person. I do not believe this account (as I said), but to try and ‘twist’ it by reference to my own description of it, really shows desperation. This statement was made, of this I have no doubt. But personally I do not believe it to be true – which was why I have not published it.
As for the 3 witnesses to my letter to the Priest in 2007, I can tell you exactly who these were. There was the Priest himself, his assistant and a sponsor to the person who had been ‘called in’ to explain the contents of my letter. This letter had been addressed personally to the Priest himself and to nobody else (as can clearly be seen on my addressed letter) although he might have said he had had to refer it ‘upwards’ – I don’t honestly know.
It was the person themselves who gave me the Priests name and his picture, and the name of the Church. In April 2007 this person sent me (or maybe even brought) a copy of a CD on which, they claimed, were pictures of ‘ghost orbs’ inside this Church. The person labelled this CD “Orbs inside St. Mary’s Church”. I still have this CD and the label was written by themselves.
Well, how’s that as the height of hypocrisy? I ask you!? It really comes back to what I have said many times before . . . “Liars need good memories”!
It really is a ‘sad old world’ sometimes L when people are forced to lie about such things. It really means so little to me now, that I can’t even be bothered with it!
Anyway, hope this concludes your queries about the episode. Please keep in touch and post on the Blog if you want. But not about this rather sad situation!
Yours for the moment,
Hi David–I have been away for a while! I found this while sorting my files out–thought it was funny!
THE BALLAD OF ROBIN HOOD OF KIRKLEES
Now gather round and listen folks,
To hear a valiant tale
Of Robin Hood the bold outlaw
Who lived in Barnesdale.
He was a handsome robber lad
He helped the weak and poor
Until he came too old to fight
And could draw his bow no more.
Good Robin went to see the doc
Who said he needed rest
But the medieval N.H.S.
Could not meet his request.
The waiting list was two years long
And poor Robin needed help
He had to seek some private care
And pay the bill himself.
He said to Little John, “Forsooth!
This ‘ere’s a sorry mess
That I can?t get my ailments cured
On the good old N.H.S.!”
Said Little John, “Now sither ? ere
You mustn’t take on so
I know a little nursing home
That’s just the place to go.
There is a priory not far hence
Kirklees,it is,by name
The prioress,it Is said by all
Is a healer of great fame.”
“The Prioress of Kirklees,” said Robin,
“I knew her long ago,
She’s of my kin and loved me well
Perhaps to her I’ll go.
She loved me in those far off days
My wife she longed to be,
But I was troth to Marian—
So she went to fair Kirklees.
And now she’s prioress, I hear
With healing gifts,you say
Perhaps she’ll cure me of my ills
For our love of yesterday. ”
So John and Robin set to ride
To seek the holy nurse
But when they got to fair Kirklees
They found instead a curse!
The Prioress would not let them in
She called out, “Scurvy knaves,
I’ll not have tourists on my land
Looking for famous graves! ”
Called Little John, “Good dame, I pray,
Save your poor kinsman ,Robin,
He needs some tender nursing care
Look at the poor man sobbing!”
The Prioress blinked her evil eye
As she recalled her lover–
“How dare he come and seek my aid,
When he went and wed another?
I’ll give him healing and by gum
From me,his former lover–
Brave Robin Hood,I have you now
And you will not recover!”
So the Wicked Prioress let him in
And locked him in her chamber,
She sent good Little John away
Leaving Robin in mortal danger.
For the Prioress had an accomplice,
Her toy boy lover Roger,
A priestly rogue from Doncaster,
He was her dickipoggy lodger.
They wove a web of wickedness
They drained their patient’s lifeblood,
They were a pair of vampire beasts,
To thus murder Robin Hood.
But wait a moment,pray,good folks,
Our Robin’s not yet done for.
He blew his trusty hunting horn
And Little John came pronto.
“Now help me shoot an arrow,John,”
Quoth Robin in his pain,
“And underneath it,bury me,
And write above my name:
HERE UNDERNEATH THIS LITTLE STONE
LIES AN ARCHER TRUE AND GOOD
HE WAS A FAMOUS YORKSHIREMAN
THEY CALLED HIM ROBIN HOOD.
But Little John shouted with rage,
“ I’ll burn this place to cinders,
I’ll put a curse upon this house
And break all of it’s windows!”
“Nay,John,good friend, I never harmed
A woman in my time,
Just lay me in the peaceful earth,
And forgive the nuns their crime.”
And with these words poor Robin died
And Little John fell weeping
But his curse upon fair Kirklees
Now later years are reaping
The nuns anre gone the priory too
And Robin’s grave forgotten
Neath fallen stones and strangling weeds
Our heritage lies rotton
Now listen well for very soon
This ballad will be endeth
But let us say, it is a sin
The Robin’s grave’s untendeth
God Yorkshire folks, pray use your wits
Think how Robin helped those needing
His grave could make a lot of brass
For a liittle bit of weeding
The Nottinghamites have done quite well
From an old oak tree in Sherwood
So Wakefield and Kirklees unite
And save your Robin Hood
Lets lift the curse from our Kirklees
Where the prioress knows no rest
As with her red haired lover priest
Theys till both thwart our quest!
OH EVIL PAIR, BEGONE BEGONE
LET ROBIN REST IN PEACE
AND LET US TRULY HONOUR HIM
IN HIS GRAVE AT FAIR KIRKLEES
It might be a bit different from your experience! By the way I have been told that the grave and gatehouse is now in the hands of a “group” but thats only hearsay, since her ladyship s departure to fairer pastures. erm. Theya re still refusing to allow my books at the walks, Mr Norcliffe wrote me a huffy e mail but he cant blame Lady A any more.He just waffles and huffs and puffs! I shall be writing to the Courier again, watch this space! Your trip there, which should be on Red Monkey–I joke of course—will be mentioned, and Red Monkey!
I make no comment on your prowse not being a literary genius! Lets just hope Robin Hood’d ghost doesn’t get to see it or you might be getting a nocturnal visit! Coincidence really that you should write now as I saw D at the weekend and he stayed a night (you know, yet another person who had all his private emails illegally published and had to report it after threats were made to contact his Film Union) Anyway he’s fine and says he’ll be contacting you when he gets back. (Well, he’s back in Yorkshire now). I have not heard from Andy for awhile but apparently D is still in touch with him.
Crikey, Barbara, that ain’t poetry. Allow me to try my hand at it…
Round Nottingham or so they say
Olde Robin was in motion.
And then one day in Yorkshire
The folks there got a notion.
They said, “Lets cash in on Robin’s tale”
“So’s we can make some dosh!”
And now a pretty legend
Has turned to poxy mish mosh.
Obviously puss in boots knows absolutely nothing about the situation and what the whole business has been about since 1984 and I really cant be bothered to explain as those who are truly interested in the story wouldnt try to make witty repartee based on so little knowledge.
personally i dont see what all the fuss is about Robin Hood.
barbara are u sure ur not a bit obsessed by the whole thing?
all this stuff about wailing ghosts, vampires or banshees is a bit OTT.
i doubt hes even buried up there.
I’m keeping out of this and will just sit back amused! I suppose at least if people get on to Robbing Hood, I won’t have to withhold comments . . . I hope!
So over to you Barbara!
well craig if I am obsessed so is the whole world,like all those books tv and films? And I thought you w ere into all this whoo whoo ghosty stuff yourself. Whether you doubt Robin’s buried at Kirklees or not is quite irrelevant at the end of the day, you havent done the research so cant give an informed opinion, only your subjective feelings which are just that. I wasnt the person who brought up the Kirklees Vampire theory, or the ghost stories, I just did the historical research which led to present day dickipoggy in the funny handshake club.
tata old bean
“Anyone who uses their middle finger to point instead of their index one works for the Devil.”
…or perhap’s suffers from arthiritis?
barbara i wasnt having a go but it just seems that ur always on one about robin hood.
loads of ur posts on this blog have been about robin hood or something about red monkey films or the situation in whole.
just an observation.
as for me, i’m half and half with woo woo stuff.
i dont believe in vampires
if they do exist its probably something to do with an electrical relay triggering captured images.
some sort of cosmic camera.
or cosmic joke.
maybe some energy as we are all energy linked.
Bill Hicks said it right with:
“…all matter is merely energy condensed to a slow vibration — that we are all one consciousness experiencing itself subjectively. There’s no such thing as death, life is only a dream, and we’re the imagination of ourselves.”
Anyone who uses their middle finger to point instead of their index one works for the Devil. This is with regards to a certain individual and documentary evidence shown on film on the Discovery Channel of him doing it (using their middle finger to point). This is always a trait in evildoers. Those schooled in the mysteries of Kabbalah will confirm my assumption.
On a less esoteric note, your notes on the Wood are amazing. I wonder what theories of science could explain away such psychogeographies of occurences. Certain activites seem to belong to certain areas, or neighbourhoods, as if time were moved or swayed by some unknown source of power: ley-lines.
Thanks for that Rehan. I agree about the Woods (come to that in a minute) but please do be careful when alluding to ‘him’. Its not that you said anything wrong, but I am anxious not to ‘open the floodgates again’ to some people here who I know just can’t wait to get onto the Highgate subject – and the Yorkshire one come to that. It creates work for myself as I have to answer peoples’ questions without ignoring them as has always been my policy. (To ignore queried issues might otherwise be taken as a ‘sign of guilt’ – well, you know how some people can twist things!).
Highgate Wood certainly has a ley line (perhaps two) running through it. Queen’s Wood is by far the more ‘sinister’ of the two, and it could well be that its ‘atmosphere’ actually ‘triggers’ very negative thinking in the case of some human beings. It could well explain the negative attraction of the place to negative-minded people – if that makes sense.
As an aside, I do not want to play the ‘Devil’s Advocate’ here, but what do you think of the Robin stories, Rehan? I mean, do you accept that that’s his grave at Kirklees, or not?
For the moment,
well craig, the reason is that my interest in Yorkshire Robin Hood–his grave near where I live—led me to make contact with the Londoners, via JPL OF THE LONDON ROBIN HOOD CLUB so one thing led to another, then the legend that the prioress who bled Robin to death was a vampire. So thats where I am coming from firstly, I got to know David afterwards as a result of this so if you can bbbbbbb”BEAR WITH ME” if I do bring it into the arena occasionally–maybe you have no idea of the ten or so years of fighting and insults that have raged on the net on message boards over this particular subject, when all too often it was the start of a thread which would suddenly erupt with certain people hurling insults right left and centre then dragging David in and ultimately getting banned or shut down. That is what David wants to avoid! As it is his blog he can make sure that nobody hi-jacks it and starts a stink!
10 years of fighting and insults?
sounds a bit ‘bonkers’ to me.
speaking of RH, i thought the latest bbc series was a load of shit.
the guy playing robin looks like a tramp or kiddie fiddler.
i loved the old one on itv in the 80’s.
it was more realistic and well acted.
the kevin costner film however was rubbish.
Yes Craig–I have files and files on record of all the nasty comments and evil nonsence written about myself and David, usually starting from a Robin Hood platform and I neednt tell you who the culprit was. At times it was funny when you got used to the ridiculousness of it all, and there was also the Kirklees capdoffers adding theri two pennorth( to ten pennorth more like) with their dickipoggy agenda–I have yet to find out what has actually happened at Kirklees since milady died but I understand the sites have got to “a group”–what group? but seemingly not family, so I have to find out more. Talk about some fold being two sausages short of a full english!I gather there is still a few rumblings around trying to plaster David’s–and possibly my–name over various sites, but its nothing like it was before! I agree most, if not all, the films are crap and totally historically rubbish, both to the story and the historical research for the period–they lump medieval tos tart about 1000 ad and finish 1500 and anything goes in between. I dont watch such silly programmes, ten minutes as a reccy is usually enough. Our story is much better and includes modern true-life day drama–we have some footage but our director either got cold feet or for whatever reason never finsished what he was doing. Probably warned off.