IA IA - Johnny Gosch, 12, Des Moines, 5 Sept 1982 - What if no ring / No conspiracy?

[Roy Harrold]

Her reaction sadly will probably be that kcksum is involved in the ring b/c it seemsthat everyone who has questioned her has been labeled that way.

Angry messages posted to my blogsite suggest some people are very upset that these photos have failed to restore full control over the discussion of this topic to the conspiracy theorists.

I'm going to back off for awhile and look after other stuff I've been neglecting, but I'll be watching developments.

 

[Dr. Doogie]

Here is a little more about the "other mother" Patricia Johnson-Holm from her profile in Yahoo Groups:

"You might as well know my birth had to do with Roswell. Birthdate is 7-9-47 in Longview, WA. As for the latest news just about everything so far has been prohibited from me, due to the above info and only recently has it been possible to type out this PROFILE."

And this is the woman that is verifying the validity of the photographs...

 

[mjak]

I believe the connection between NG and Patricia Johnson Hoag, indicates deliberate deception on the part of NG. As when she first posted the picture on the sight of the 3 gagged boys she plead for the parents to come forward and identify their child. Now she states 3 weeks ago the mother came forward and give her this information. These two women are involved in a group together and the online evidence indicates they knew each other and discussed Johnny's dissapearance a year and a half ago. The fact that NG did not present Patricia Johnson Hoag as someone she has known with a missing son, but alluded to the fact she only appeared 3 weeks ago is in my opinion a clear attempt at deliberate deception. NG Is not presenting the facts as she is finding them. If mental illness was really at the core of NG's behavior then there would be know need for deception because NG would believe her own deceptions and have no reason to alter information in support of her beliefs when presenting them to the public. When you make a deliberate choice to alter information then you are in essence demonstarting the ability to distinguish between truth and untruth. One could argue a paranoid person might decieve to protect ones self, but in this situation I am not buying into that. At this time I feel the answers to Johnnys wearabouts have nothing to do with NG's claims. I think Johnny's father needs much more exporation , as this was the first time he allowed Johnny to deliver his papers alone. I find that intresting. If I was investigating what happened to Johnny, I would want to talk to his father and siblings now. I have sympathy for NG for what hse has gone through. I don't know what her agenda is but when one is not being truthful , one has to be doubted. Time to move on to other areas of this investigation.

mjak

 

[Dr. Doogie]

Here is an example of PJH referring about the "Franklin Cover-Up" in July 2004. Amazing coincidence for a woman who discovered that her son was depicted in a photograph that didn't surface until 2006...

 

[mjak]

Here is an example of PJH referring about the "Franklin Cover-Up" in July 2004. Amazing coincidence for a woman who discovered that her son was depicted in a photograph that didn't surface until 2006...

Exactly Dr. Doogie. totaly rediculous

What does she mean by her birth has to do with Roswell? Is she implying she is
an alien?

On and on it goes and meanwhile a boy dissapeared........

mjak

 

[Dr. Doogie]

What does she mean by her birth has to do with Roswell? Is she implying she is
an alien?

Either that, or she believes that her birth is as a result of an alien/human hybrid experiment. At a time when NG could really use a Sherlock Holmes, she seems to have gotten Art Bell instead. Its sad - I think she has finally lost it...

 

[Dr. Doogie]

Not to beat a dead horse, but here is how PJH describes her Washington Patriot Party (from her Yahoo Groups page):

The Washington Patriot Party founder is also the Chair Person, Protem, Patricia Johnson-Holm, co-chair person is Will Wilson, are striving to build a thinking process and attentive concern with in the citizenry's minds who live in the Northwest region that is known as, or thereof that is referred to as being the State of Washington, that is still under dispute of actually not being a State due to the discovery of the RightWay Law Group researcher named Riggins who discovered that the possibility is now more known as being a proven reality that the State of Washington was never properly or legally ratified or registered as a State with an actual State Constitution and that the State of Washington is still under actual Constitutional Law has never been an actual State and it is currently the intent of the Washington Patriot Party and it's current and soon to be vastly building in National regional membership that will forge the way for the Washington Patriot Party to reestablish a Washington State Constitution that is properly and Constitutionally Lawful for the citizenry of the Region that is known as the State of Washington that will then be comprehensively provided a proper and lawful State of Washington Constitution and that is further lawfully ratified as being a Sovereign State that can with the recognition as it thus becoming and being the Sovereign State of Washington. The Washington State Patriot Party Constituency and Membership.

Evidently, the WPP believes in two things: 1) That Washington never actually became a state, and 2) Punctuation should be avoided at all costs. LOL!

 

[kcksum]

Not to beat a dead horse, but here is how PJH describes her Washington Patriot Party (from her Yahoo Groups page):

The Washington Patriot Party founder is also the Chair Person, Protem, Patricia Johnson-Holm, co-chair person is Will Wilson, are striving to build a thinking process and attentive concern with in the citizenry's minds who live in the Northwest region that is known as, or thereof that is referred to as being the State of Washington, that is still under dispute of actually not being a State due to the discovery of the RightWay Law Group researcher named Riggins who discovered that the possibility is now more known as being a proven reality that the State of Washington was never properly or legally ratified or registered as a State with an actual State Constitution and that the State of Washington is still under actual Constitutional Law has never been an actual State and it is currently the intent of the Washington Patriot Party and it's current and soon to be vastly building in National regional membership that will forge the way for the Washington Patriot Party to reestablish a Washington State Constitution that is properly and Constitutionally Lawful for the citizenry of the Region that is known as the State of Washington that will then be comprehensively provided a proper and lawful State of Washington Constitution and that is further lawfully ratified as being a Sovereign State that can with the recognition as it thus becoming and being the Sovereign State of Washington. The Washington State Patriot Party Constituency and Membership.

Evidently, the WPP believes in two things: 1) That Washington never actually became a state, and 2) Punctuation should be avoided at all costs. LOL!

oh my goodness the lack of punctuation was killing me!!!!!

 

[docwho3]

Angry messages posted to my blogsite suggest some people are very upset that these photos have failed to restore full control over the discussion of this topic to the conspiracy theorists.

I'm going to back off for awhile and look after other stuff I've been neglecting, but I'll be watching developments.

The conspiracy theorists still have the other thread to use so they aren't being muzzled or anything but I have noticed that once they got it they no longer seemed to want it any more.

Catch you later.

 

[Mr. E]

The conspiracy theorists still have the other thread to use so they aren't being muzzled or anything but I have noticed that once they got it they no longer seemed to want it any more.

Catch you later.

Do you have to be one or the other? I'm still on the fence, not willing to ignore anything, no matter how outlandish. I think I'll remain like this until the case is solved (fingers crossed). One part of my brain says, "This is impossible," while at the same time the other part of my brain says, "Maybe it's just so crazy that it's true." Maybe there is a shred of truth in what NG says; maybe she's just gone off the deep end. I just want to know what happened to the boy. I've been following the news on him for over 20 years!

 

[mjak]

Do you have to be one or the other? I'm still on the fence, not willing to ignore anything, no matter how outlandish. I think I'll remain like this until the case is solved (fingers crossed). One part of my brain says, "This is impossible," while at the same time the other part of my brain says, "Maybe it's just so crazy that it's true." Maybe there is a shred of truth in what NG says; maybe she's just gone off the deep end. I just want to know what happened to the boy. I've been following the news on him for over 20 years!

You state exactly how I feel. However, now that I know NG is not presenting facts truthfully, it makes me doubt her even more.

mjak

 

[docwho3]

Do you have to be one or the other? I'm still on the fence, not willing to ignore anything, no matter how outlandish. I think I'll remain like this until the case is solved . . .

No, you certainly do not have to be one or the other but this thread has a more limited premise posting topic than the other thread so what is posted in each is different. This thread is for nonconspiracy type premise, as its title says. That does not mean you can't post in each thread within the scope of that threads topic of discussion if not done just to create verbal fights or just to argue for arguments sake. I was merely commenting on the fact that the other thread, which was once so populated with posts by the conspiricists now seems to have had about one post since oct 20th/2006 and that post was today, OCT 25/2006 and was posted by yourself.

******************
Edited to add:
When I created this thread it was to give those of us with a non conspiracy, non pedo ring view of the case a place to post without having to scroll through lots of posts from the conspiracy people to connect and discuss our own approach to the case. Posting about 2 quite different approaches to a case in one thread can cause each group to have to scroll through multiple posts which have nothing or very little to do with their own appraoch to the case and this is aggravating and can cause friction as well. So I decided to create this thread but I have always supported the rights of the conspiracists to post in the other thread about their own appraoch to the case. If someone wants to talk conspiracy with the conspiracists in the other thread and also talk non conspiracy thoughts in this thread that's cool too as long as people aren't trying to start verbal fights as some were once doing.

 

[Mr. E]

You state exactly how I feel. However, now that I know NG is not presenting facts truthfully, it makes me doubt her even more.

mjak

Exactly. I'm sure others feel this way, too. Those photos gave such hope, then they were debunked, then NG came up with this new outrageous, paper-thin theory, and we're left with such an overwhelming disappointment. I try hard to be "on her side" -- I wonder why? I guess I just feel so bad for her.

 

[kcksum]

Well. I told you she wouldn't answer any of the real questions I asked her. She basically yells at me for attacking her so to speak and then goes on to list how she is a champion for children's rights.


The photos of Johnny are Johnny.... I did not know Patricia Holmes prior to this situation. The photo is on my website because MY SON is in the photo. I told Patricia to be prepared for attacks such as you are doing now. I have never seen a situation like this before where people are so eager to attack the mothers of the children.

The boys laying next to my son are the "son's of some mother who is waiting for answers". I posted them to try and locate those mothers. The post as well as the update is on my site for a reason. I am following the advice of investigators ... you may not fully understand why certain information is released... I cannot help that ....

Please do not write to me again... I have quite enough on my plate without having to read attacks about why or how I am investigating. I am receiving photos of children every day .... sent by the people who have held them for years. They are of my son and others... I am making them available to the National Center for Missing Children to help solve other cases. So if all you have to do is attack me then please do me a favor and move on to someone else. I have worked hard for decades to protect children.


I believe that her statement saying she didn't know Johnson Holms prior to this is blatantly false, as we have seen where they have posted on the same sites together and have discussed the franklin cover-up together. Sadly this women says she is now receving pictures every day of missing children. I think someone is messing with her badly. I will not write her back because she has asked me not to. I will respect that. However, I encourage any of you with questions about this holmes woman to write her and spell it out to her. Maybe if she hears from enough people who tell her "hey you and her talked together on this date" or "hey this woman says she was the product of aliens at roswell" she might get an idea of how this lady is very probably involved in a fraud, she answered me with in 24 hours. I was most disappointed that she never answered why this womans son was never listed as missing. If she works with the center for missing and exploited children,she should have wondered why this woman never listed her son with them. I don't know if her comment about un released information was alluding to that, but it didn't answer the question.
All in all, Noreen is real good at explaining things when she has a cop to bash or a conspiracy to back up.....but when it comes to simple questions about why a boy who's mom says he's missing was never reported missing....she gives the smoke andmirrors you're attacking me routine. If she's working with investigators, they suck.:banghead: :banghead: :banghead: :banghead: :banghead: :banghead: :banghead: :banghead: :banghead:

 

[2sisters]

at least she knows now that people are starting to see through this, I think you did the right thing. The fact that none of your questions were answered speaks volumes. Hey, at least you weren't accused of being in on it.

 

[cappuccina]

....and for writing your letter to begin with...IMO, this is the most delusional statement in her letter.

"I am receiving photos of children every day .... sent by the people who have held them for years. They are of my son and others..."

This is some seriously delusional *advertiser censored*.

I am sure that she is working with investigators of the "Lou Smit" variety. Anyone can and will research anything you want them to, the way you want them to for a fee. You will notice that she uses no mainstream investigators, researchers, forensic scientists, etc. or anything of the sort... (i.e., no one credentialed and experienced...)

Also, and this is very important, you are absolutely correct in your analysis of the "tone" of her letter. If you had written an inquiry to John Walsh or Marc Klass, or Mark Lunsford, you would have gotten a much more fact-oriented, positive response. The response you got was from a woman who has built up so many layers around herself that she has "lost" the truth...

 

[kcksum]

....and for writing your letter to begin with...IMO, this is the most delusional statement in her letter.

"I am receiving photos of children every day .... sent by the people who have held them for years. They are of my son and others..."

This is some seriously delusional *advertiser censored*.

I am sure that she is working with investigators of the "Lou Smit" variety. Anyone can and will research anything you want them to, the way you want them to for a fee. You will notice that she uses no mainstream investigators, researchers, forensic scientists, etc. or anything of the sort... (i.e., no one credentialed and experienced...)

Also, and this is very important, you are absolutely correct in your analysis of the "tone" of her letter. If you had written an inquiry to John Walsh or Marc Klass, or Mark Lunsford, you would have gotten a much more fact-oriented, positive response. The response you got was from a woman who has built up so many layers around herself that she has "lost" the truth...

absolutely. I also have always thought that if any of this were legitamit, John Walsh would be all over it....every single time his show aired. Noreen Gosch was one of the first parents he met after Adam dies and he began championing the rights of missing children. It was Noreen Gosch and Etan Patz's mom. If he really believed that there was a cover up and he really believed that these detectives in Florida were making a false claim, he would be all over it. There is no one who would want justice and answers more for Noreen than John Walsh or Marc Klaas. They obviously have seen what we all have seen, a woman who is caught somewhere between delusions and a nightmere.

 

[Dr. Doogie]

I think that NG's response pretty much puts the last nail in the coffin of the conspiracy theory for me. I find this very sad - here is a woman who's dedication to finding her son has driven her to the point of loss of reason. She has accomplished much for missing children which deserves our gratitude and respect. However, her latest ventures are pathetic and deserve our sympathy.

 

[kcksum]

I think that NG's response pretty much puts the last nail in the coffin of the conspiracy theory for me. I find this very sad - here is a woman who's dedication to finding her son has driven her to the point of loss of reason. She has accomplished much for missing children which deserves our gratitude and respect. However, her latest ventures are pathetic and deserve our sympathy.

ok, I couldn't stand it so I replied to her letter. ONly, I can't find it after I sent it to paste and copy it here?!?!I told her I was only replying to her statements and that I would not contact her again because she asked me not to. I pointed out to her that there are blog archives showing her and Holms discussing things the same day. I told her about this womans claims to be the product of aliens. I pointed out again that this woman never listed her son as missing. I approached it all saying that I was trying to give her the heads up about this woman, not trying to attack her in any way. I urged her to let her investigators to do a background check on this woman. I will post any reply she sends me, I will also try to find the note I sent her.

 

[cappuccina]

...while I agree with Dr. Doogie that Mrs. Gosch has done a lot for missing/exploited children, she is now desperately in need of reality therapy...