IA IA - Johnny Gosch, 12, W Des Moines, 5 Sept 1982 - What happened? - #1

DNA Solves
DNA Solves
DNA Solves
Status
Not open for further replies.
I can see the boy's hip bone sticking up. The fingers abnormally long. That could indicate a health problem such as Marfan's syndrome. I would more believe that he is an older skinnier boy on the left than supposed Johnny on the far right. How disgusting and troubling to even see these pics. The gags are really not what I would expect a gag to look like, and that is even more troubling. I hope that they turn out to be a hoax.
 
FourthBase said:
The b&w photo is the one purported to be the one taken soon after the abduction, so if Gosch was starved or anything it would be the other way around.

.
I don't believe it's been purported that the B&W photo was taken soon after the abduction, just that the pants are the same pants that Johnny was wearing when he was abducted. I don't think that necessarily means anything as far as a timeline.....but I could be wrong. There is so much to read on in this case, so it's possible I missed the part about it being said the photo was taken close to his abduction...
 
Upon looking at the photos again, there is one striking similarity that I see between the boy with the #15 shirt and the boy in the B&W photo. They both look like each of them has "bags" under their eyes. The word bags isn't really the correct word I'm looking for, but my mind is failing me at the moment. Almost like the very top of their frontal cheekbones are so pronounced that it seems to almost darken the area directly beneath their eyes and above their frontal cheekbones....

Anybody else see this or are my eyes deceiving me???
 
julianne said:
Upon looking at the photos again, there is one striking similarity that I see between the boy with the #15 shirt and the boy in the B&W photo. They both look like each of them has "bags" under their eyes. The word bags isn't really the correct word I'm looking for, but my mind is failing me at the moment. Almost like the very top of their frontal cheekbones are so pronounced that it seems to almost darken the area directly beneath their eyes and above their frontal cheekbones....

Anybody else see this or are my eyes deceiving me???
No, I definitely see that, too.
It's the one striking similarity.
Whatever you want to call it...
Bags, puffy, a ledge...
And they look natural, not like black eyes.

I don't believe it's been purported that the B&W photo was taken soon after the abduction, just that the pants are the same pants that Johnny was wearing when he was abducted. I don't think that necessarily means anything as far as a timeline.....but I could be wrong. There is so much to read on in this case, so it's possible I missed the part about it being said the photo was taken close to his abduction...
Good point, maybe Noreen is assuming a timeline. The kidnappers could have simply taken a photo months later with the same pants. Not that it would be logical, but it's possible. So that makes tying the pants to a timeline impossible, as far as I can see.

I can see the boy's hip bone sticking up. The fingers abnormally long. That could indicate a health problem such as Marfan's syndrome. I would more believe that he is an older skinnier boy on the left than supposed Johnny on the far right. How disgusting and troubling to even see these pics. The gags are really not what I would expect a gag to look like, and that is even more troubling. I hope that they turn out to be a hoax.
You see a hip bone sticking up?
Seems pretty high up on his torso to be a hip.
And wouldn't we see some ribs if he were that emaciated?

Good call on the fingers, though. Sometimes when hands are unnaturally positioned in a way we don't expect them to be, the ordinary length of human fingers can seem oddly "long". But those fingers do indeed look very skinny and long. As opposed to #15's fingers, which look relatively puffy and short. But again, they're in the shadows (which could diminish "skinny" details like protruding bones) and the exaggerated reddish hue of the photo is bound to make them look "fleshier".
 
Janet said:
There going to talk about this case right now on Fox news "The Line Up"
I saw Fox today and was horrified when i saw the photos.It is truly heartbreaking.I also thought Noreen seemed perfecly normal.Poor woman.i believe her.It must be awful for her.This case needs to be totally reinvestigated as I for one believe there could be a pedophile ring. Why is it so unaccepable to some.O.k. I do not necessarily by the Whitehouse angle but we live in crazy times with little 'respect' for each other.I want Johnny to be found dead or alive and I want all parents of missing kids to have peace.f the photo with the 'other' kids is legit then a pedophile ring is not such a stretch to believe.
 
txsvicki said:
I can see the boy's hip bone sticking up. The fingers abnormally long. That could indicate a health problem such as Marfan's syndrome. I would more believe that he is an older skinnier boy on the left than supposed Johnny on the far right. How disgusting and troubling to even see these pics. The gags are really not what I would expect a gag to look like, and that is even more troubling. I hope that they turn out to be a hoax.
Yes, i agree.The lad in the b/w shot looks older 13 or 14.The blonde lad in the colour photo looks younger.He is rounder in the face.I do'nt believe they are the same boy.
 
FourthBase said:
No, I definitely see that, too.
It's the one striking similarity.
Whatever you want to call it...
Bags, puffy, a ledge...
And they look natural, not like black eyes.


Good point, maybe Noreen is assuming a timeline. The kidnappers could have simply taken a photo months later with the same pants. Not that it would be logical, but it's possible. So that makes tying the pants to a timeline impossible, as far as I can see.


You see a hip bone sticking up?
Seems pretty high up on his torso to be a hip.
And wouldn't we see some ribs if he were that emaciated?

Good call on the fingers, though. Sometimes when hands are unnaturally positioned in a way we don't expect them to be, the ordinary length of human fingers can seem oddly "long". But those fingers do indeed look very skinny and long. As opposed to #15's fingers, which look relatively puffy and short. But again, they're in the shadows (which could diminish "skinny" details like protruding bones) and the exaggerated reddish hue of the photo is bound to make them look "fleshier".


Yes, to me it looks like the bound position he's in is pushing his hip area up and the rib area and back looks flattened out. I guess what I'm getting at is wondering if this is just a slender kid, hopefully a hoax, or one of the boys who has been held captive for awhile and has gotten skinny and no shape from being bound all the time.
 
nanandjim said:
Thanks, Michelle. I thought that her remains had been found. Such a sad, sad case, especially for her Mom. :(
Amy's case reminds me of Carrie Culberson minus the boyfriend. I just cant fathom my child disapearing into thin air, never finding anything left from them. So tragic, I would be in a grave and that is the truth. The unknown would literally kill me. Its so sad for them.
 
Richard said:
....It appears to be a red blanket with a black stripe on the end shown. I believe that this is a wool "Hudson Bay" blanket - probably a "four point" model. This type of blanket has been made since the 1600's, and was a popular item of trade with the Indians. It has been available in modern times through such places as L.L. Bean and was being sold by them in the early 1980's. There were a number of different color combinations and sizes available....Link:
http://www.johnnygosch.com/
The red blanket in the photo of three boys appears to be a heavy wool Hudson's Bay Point Blanket. These blankets are still being made today and the current price of a "four point" blanket like the one shown is $240 from Cabella's. They were pretty expensive in 1982 as well, selling then for probably around $100 each from LL Bean (Freeport, Maine). In the 1970's they were also sold by the origional Herter's of Waseca, Minnesota.

These blankets have been made in a number of colors over the years, including Red with Black stripes, Green with Black Stripes, White with Blue stripes, Gold with darker Gold stripes, White with stripes of Red, Black, Green and Yellow, etc. This one - Red with Black Stripes - is one of the most common types.

They are called "Point Blankets" because of the origional barter system that they were made for starting in 1670. The Hudson's Bay Company imported various types of trade goods to Canada to be traded to Indians for furs. Points were assigned to certain amounts or qualities of furs and also to the trade goods. An Indian with four points worth of furs could trade them for a "four point" blanket.

The Blankets all have an offical label sewn onto the bottom left corner. It is white with gold lettering in both English and French, stating the following:

Hudson's Bay Point Blanket
Beneath that is the official seal of the Hudson's Bay Company, Incorporated 1670
"The seal of quality. 100% Wool"
Made in England CA00234
Canada Reg No. 19575
US Reg No. 220747

The Black Stripes on top and bottom of the blanket are between 5 and 3 quarters of an inch and 6 inches wide. They are 7 and a half to 8 inches from the edges of the blanket.

Above the bottom stripe and above the label are the "Points" or lines embroidered into the blanket. This one would have had four such black lines, each five inches long, parallel to the bottom large stripe, spaced two inches apart extending from the left side of the blanket in.

This is not an elegant bed with fancy bed spread and ruffles. It is a standard double bed with not much of a box spring beneath it. The blanket, however, is an expensive one, and as such the owner protected it by placing another blanket on top of it before putting the boys on the bed.

The color and type of blanket, and the way the bed is made indicates that this is the home of a single man, possibly one who enjoys hunting, fishing, and outdoors. Sears Roebuck did NOT carry such blankets in 1980. They were only available through Outdoor type catalogs. Since they are a "high dollar" import item, still being produced today, the manufacturer could state specifically what companies in the US and Canada sold them.

Being a wool blanket, it cannot be washed easily, so there might well be DNA evidence attatched to it. Being a special and expensive item, it might still be in the possession of the man who took the boys.

The bindings on the boys all seem to be the same material - possibly strips torn from a sheet. The only knot that can be seen is a square knot.

The haircuts on the boys and the clothing items seem consistant with the early 1980's.
 
julianne said:
Upon looking at the photos again, there is one striking similarity that I see between the boy with the #15 shirt and the boy in the B&W photo. They both look like each of them has "bags" under their eyes. The word bags isn't really the correct word I'm looking for, but my mind is failing me at the moment. Almost like the very top of their frontal cheekbones are so pronounced that it seems to almost darken the area directly beneath their eyes and above their frontal cheekbones....

Anybody else see this or are my eyes deceiving me???


I see it. He looks as though he hasn't slept in awhile, or maybe had allergies. One of my boys has those blue/black bags under his eyes, and it's from his many, many allergies.

I tend to think that these two pics are showing the same boy. If this is not some sort of evil joke, then the horror those kids were caught up in is heart breaking.

WHO are those other two children? And why doesn't anyone recognize them as being missing kids from the same time Johnny went missing?
 
WHO are those other two children? And why doesn't anyone recognize them as being missing kids from the same time Johnny went missing?
Perhaps because the Doe Network, Charley Project, and NCMEC databases are only as thorough as the LE agencies allow them to be? If there were, say, a mandate that every missing child case be submitted by LE to a central internet database, then surely these kids could be identified. That is, assuming they've been reported to the police in the first place.
 
Richard said:
The red blanket in the photo of three boys appears to be a heavy wool Hudson's Bay Point Blanket.
The bindings on the boys all seem to be the same material - possibly strips torn from a sheet. The only knot that can be seen is a square knot.

The haircuts on the boys and the clothing items seem consistant with the early 1980's.
Richard,
Thanks for the information on the four point blankets. I have not seen one before. I too agree their clothing and hair cuts resemble the time period. IMO, the bindings look like cloth also and not plastic. Anyhow, here's a pic of the blanket.

995041_C.JPG
 
txsvicki said:
I can see the boy's hip bone sticking up. The fingers abnormally long. That could indicate a health problem such as Marfan's syndrome. I would more believe that he is an older skinnier boy on the left than supposed Johnny on the far right. How disgusting and troubling to even see these pics. The gags are really not what I would expect a gag to look like, and that is even more troubling. I hope that they turn out to be a hoax.

I too noticed the gags. They are all perfect and tied lower on the head than needed for best function. The ties are all perfect also; looks like someone with a true bondage fetish orchestrated these photos.This looks very staged since the gags and ties are not disturbed by struggling. I wouldn't be surprised if it's a "catalogue" for pedos. The other two could be props or "models" which is why we can't tie them to anyone reprted missing.
 
I apologize for not taking the time to read all 8 pages of this thread before asking, but was wondering if you all had commented yet on John DeCamp's book re the sexual abuse of kids and corrupt politicians? I forget the name of his book but could probably find it easily if it hasn't already been mentioned. (Note: I checked, and it's called "The Franklin Cover-up).

This whole topic is so controversial that it's hard to have a non-volatile conversation about it. I don't know what to believe... parts of me believe it and other parts don't want to face that it could all be true. DeCamp's book had an introduction by the former director of the CIA (Colby, who was later found mysteriously drowned)... so it's hard to turn away from that type of endorsement.
 
Noreen was interviewed about these photos on local noon news today in Iowa. (the abc channel here). she said when she first saw teh pictures she almost fell over. She also said she cannot stop looking for her boy becasue if she doesn't look for him, nobody will be looking for him. Sad. I hope answers one way or another are found soon re: these photos. I do hope they are a hoax, but I also want her to be right and people to start believing her.
 
I wish I could have seen the broadcast. Do you think they will rerun later tonight? There isn't a thing about it on their website.
 
Richard said:
The bindings on the boys all seem to be the same material - possibly strips torn from a sheet. The only knot that can be seen is a square knot.

The haircuts on the boys and the clothing items seem consistant with the early 1980's.

Richard, I blew the picture up and keep looking at it and I think the boy in the left of the picture, not the boy thought to be Johnny Grosch, has a flexicuff
bounding his hands, while the other boys hands are bound with some type of white fabric. what do you think?

mjak
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Staff online

Members online

Online statistics

Members online
158
Guests online
2,118
Total visitors
2,276

Forum statistics

Threads
602,209
Messages
18,136,656
Members
231,270
Latest member
appleatcha
Back
Top