IA IA - Johnny Gosch, 12, West Des Moines, 5 Sept 1982 #4

DNA Solves
DNA Solves
DNA Solves

New Posts

GoBrewers - yes, there are more problems with Bonacci's version(s) of events. One of the most serious would be: what appears to be a public statement, by the DMPD, that Bonacci's family members told them years ago that Paul was in Omaha Nebraska on the day of Johnny's disappearance.

I still am not of the opinion that Noreen Gosch is "crazy". However, my opinion of the credibility of any & all statements she has ever made about the case is rock bottom now. I have reasons for believing that Ms Gosch has participated in online discussions of the case, using pseudonyms, for a considerable length of time - and engaged in deceptions in attempts to hide that fact from members of the public.

I am currently of the opinion that Ms Gosch (and perhaps other persons who have been 'supporters' or 'associates' of hers at one or another time) may be so obsessed with "ownership" of the case, so obsessed with "solving" the case from outside the parameters of official law enforcement agencies, that she/they might be publicly endorsing entirely fictitious scenarios involving persons who never actually existed or were never genuinely involved, because those scenarios and "suspects" were generated by her/them (or their associates) and support the storyline she/they have chosen to be "Johnny's Story". I believe that she/they might eventually declare the case entirely solved, with not a scrap of solid corroboration for any of it recognised by official policing agencies.

It is my opinion, at this time, that even statements of seemingly verifiable data - such as that Paul Bonacci described physical features of Johnny Gosch that had never been publicly released - should be considered "possibly true" rather than certain facts. I no longer believe that Ms Gosch, or her past associates, would be troubled by allowing false impressions or misinformation which conveniently supports their own narratives to go uncorrected even if they knew it to be false.
 
Roy Harrold said:
I still am not of the opinion that Noreen Gosch is "crazy". However, my opinion of the credibility of any & all statements she has ever made about the case is rock bottom now. I have reasons for believing that Ms Gosch has participated in online discussions of the case, using pseudonyms, for a considerable length of time - and engaged in deceptions in attempts to hide that fact from members of the public.

I am currently of the opinion that Ms Gosch (and perhaps other persons who have been 'supporters' or 'associates' of hers at one or another time) may be so obsessed with "ownership" of the case, so obsessed with "solving" the case from outside the parameters of official law enforcement agencies, that she/they might be publicly endorsing entirely fictitious scenarios involving persons who never actually existed or were never genuinely involved, because those scenarios and "suspects" were generated by her/them (or their associates) and support the storyline she/they have chosen to be "Johnny's Story". I believe that she/they might eventually declare the case entirely solved, with not a scrap of solid corroboration for any of it recognised by official policing agencies.

It is my opinion, at this time, that even statements of seemingly verifiable data - such as that Paul Bonacci described physical features of Johnny Gosch that had never been publicly released - should be considered "possibly true" rather than certain facts. I no longer believe that Ms Gosch, or her past associates, would be troubled by allowing false impressions or misinformation which conveniently supports their own narratives to go uncorrected even if they knew it to be false.
Click to expand...

[snipped & bbm]

wow that's harsh & kinda cryptic too IMO

I don't have an opinion one way or the other but am interested in why you think that she's using pseudonyms & if she is, why it should matter ... of course she's going to 'engage in deception' to hide her alias; otherwise she wouldn't need an alias at all

and from what I understand, she's obsessed with 'ownership' of the case b/c well, aside from the fact that it's about her son, her trust of LE has suffered over the years (not to mention she's been exposed to so many conspiracy theories, she probably doesn't trust her own dog, if she has one)

I really don't follow how she would benefit from knowingly creating and 'endorsing entirely fictitious scenarios' - that doesn't solve her mystery, unless you think that she just enjoys the attention but then you did state that you don't think she's crazy so I'm scratching my head at that :waitasec: or perhaps that plays into the online pseudonyms and she's trying to fish for information?

the last part of your statement that I bolded, essentially is describing a lie by ommission, which while I don't agree with someone doing it, it's possible they think they have to 'fight dirty' so to speak or 'play the system' and that the ends will justify the means?

so on your three points of deception, yes it's possible but what does it prove?

1. does it prove that she actually had a hand in her son's disappearance and is purposely leading the public astray? is that what you're implying?

2. does it prove that she's willing to go to any lengths to find out the truth and that's led her down some strange paths?

3. does it prove anything of value to this case? or is it just more conspiracy innuendo to add to the mountain?
 
i saw the tv guide deal, i looked on the AMW website and there is a picture and a small amount of info

Mar 1993 "Jimmy" Gets Interviewed
"Jimmy stepped forward and was interviewed on AMW. While he never showed his face, Jimmy gave a lot of solid evidence. He spoke of his friendship with Johnny, showed evidence of branding he tells was a punishment for the boys, and even gave a diary he kept of his horrible experience. "

1992 Johnny's Story Airs On AMW: "Jimmy Steps Forward"
"AMW aired the Johnny Gosch story and with the help of Paul Bonacci several composite sketches were drawn of the principals he says were involved in the alleged pedophilia ring. After the show aired, Noreen Gosch received a 14 page letter from a boy named "Jimmy" who said the same men who had abducted her son had abducted him and he told her that Johnny was still alive. Noreen said he knew personal details about her son that had never before been released and she believes him. "


If the credibility of Paul Bonacci went unchecked, would one assume this could be anyone? I think AMW would have to get some kind of in depth questioning before having someone on to help aid in a missing persons case.
http://www.amw.com/missing_children/case.cfm?id=26170
 
I have no idea if it is true or not, but I have heard through the grapevine that the "JImmy" you heard on the show was actually Jimmy's voice, but they used a body double for the visuals because Jimmy was acting so erratic that they felt his twitchiness detracted from the interview.

Ultimately, I have given up trying to sort out the prophets from the liars in this case. Too many people are not who they seem. There are several "Jimmy Gibsons" and the one that I thought was legit turned out to be an imposter. Oddly enough, Paul Bonnaci seems to have verified that this imposter was the real Jimmy who appeared with him on AMW. It makes me wonder if there ever really was a Jimmy or if he was an early disinfo agent (for whatever faction) or a fictional character that others have assumed his identity over the years. All I know is that this Jimmy had me driving all around the desert one weekend looking for "Tony" when I now believe he just made up this alleged perp.

This whole case makes my head hurt. Maybe others with more stamina (and perhaps smarter than me) can make sense of it, but I now have no idea what is truth or fiction antmore.
 
Dr. Doogie said:
I have no idea if it is true or not, but I have heard through the grapevine that the "JImmy" you heard on the show was actually Jimmy's voice, but they used a body double for the visuals because Jimmy was acting so erratic that they felt his twitchiness detracted from the interview.

Ultimately, I have given up trying to sort out the prophets from the liars in this case. Too many people are not who they seem. There are several "Jimmy Gibsons" and the one that I thought was legit turned out to be an imposter. Oddly enough, Paul Bonnaci seems to have verified that this imposter was the real Jimmy who appeared with him on AMW. It makes me wonder if there ever really was a Jimmy or if he was an early disinfo agent (for whatever faction) or a fictional character that others have assumed his identity over the years. All I know is that this Jimmy had me driving all around the desert one weekend looking for "Tony" when I now believe he just made up this alleged perp.

This whole case makes my head hurt. Maybe others with more stamina (and perhaps smarter than me) can make sense of it, but I now have no idea what is truth or fiction antmore.
Click to expand...

This is where I am with this case. There's too much out there that is unverified; there are too many people who step forward to give information, then are exposed as frauds. Then the people who expose them as frauds are exposed as frauds. There is too much that is hinted at. Even the people that you think you can trust, like DeCamp, are "outed" as "bad guys." It's ridiculous and too hard to keep up with. The only thing I can say for certain is that whatever the truth is, enough people don't want it known, and the result is confusion and chaos. At this point, only a DNA-verified body of John David Gosch, alive or dead, will make me believe anything.
 
here are some interesting articles from aquino, starting with his personal website...
http://www.xeper.org/maquino/index.html

and now this is his dialogue (using his webmaster email) with David Mcgowan
http://www.whale.to/b/mcgowan34.html

These may have been posted before, and last night i had a lot more info (i lose internet around barclose here) and i will edit this post to add to them as soon as i can find more information.

Also, here is one (not quite on topic) but this is Cathy O'Brien on conspiracy theories, a lot having to do with Michael Aquino himself. I reference this article because this is contrary to what im used to reading (babbling, constant subject change, etc) she really has detailed what she has seen in her lifetime, i am trying to email to see if she can put herself into why she was just around Bush and Clinton, etc, when they had private talks...

She posts in the article about her daughter, Kelly, and how she is incarserated. Kelly must have a different last name, as i couldnt find any info, would someone be so kind as to lend a hand?
http://www.whale.to/b/brien2.html

(i can also take out the obrien stuff if needed, since it is loosely offtopic)
 
The main problems is with all the extra crazy talk, there is truth somewhere right in the middle. Certain people have lied, expanded the truth, etc. and that has hurt the case so much. I still feel there is some credibility when NG says she met with Bonacci and he told her things he knew about johnny no one else would know. In the same thought, i have trouble believing she was only met for an hour, didnt she move somewhere different?? Was SR josch there? He seems to have recluded in quite an odd way, i personally believe the person who abducted him is close to johnnys family, or was recognizable in the community at the time.(JMO)
 
You guys have restored my faith in logic and reason. Noreen Gosch, in my opinion and for want of a better term, is simply off her rocker. Having worked during my early college years in nursing homes and hospitals, I can assure you I've seen people (patients) who talk exactly like she does. The on-rush of endless paranoid blather, the perpetual freak-out, the increasingly delusional "thinking" and the constant, big-eyed sense of panic that can never be sedated: that's serious, certifiable mental illness and that's Noreen Gosch.

Best,

mysterymax
 
Tizzle said:
This was in my friend updates from Johnny's MS page. I guess there's a new documentary coming out?


This is the trailer:
http://rumur.com/hoax
Click to expand...

Thank you for telling about the new documentary coming out Tizzle. It looks interesting. I noticed that some of the footage was from the documentary Conspiracy of Silence (which can be found on youtube for anyone that wants to see it) One thing I noticed right off is that I don't think Troy Bonner is telling the truth about being burned with cigarettes. I think this because his burn scars are on the space of his arm where self harmers typically burn themselves. I don't know what to think about the rest but I really want to see this now. Have any of the children from the Franklin scandal ever admitted to lying about anything? For the record I do believe boys town and Larry King were involved with child trafficking but I have no clue as to what extent and who (Johnny Gosch and famous people) really was involved.
 
Thanks for the link, Tizzle.

Very odd choice of wording in one paragraph from that promo site for "Carefully Crafted Hoax" proposed documentary:

"A Carefully Crafted Hoax builds on the mountain of existing evidence to present a portrait of Johnny, Paul, Alisha and the rest of the throwaway kids whose lives were fatefully intertwined in the disturbing world of child prostitution".

I've never seen any info or even rumors suggesting that Johnny Gosch was ever a "throwaway kid".
 
Thanks for the kind words, Mystery Max.

Your assessment of the clinical implications for some person's behaviours is not something I'm at all qualified to dispute. Perhaps you are on to something.

Nevertheless, I remain skeptical of claims that Noreen Gosch "must be crazy". I don't think she is, just my personal opinion based on nothing more than gut feelings.

I would be willing to accept, that Ms Gosch might be neurotically obsessed with attempting to control investigations into Johnny's case, with attempting to control public perceptions about the case, and/or with promoting a storyline about Johnny & his case which may have more to do with "Johnny as a symbol for certain social problems, causes or issues" than with verifiable realities.
 
Dr. Doogie said:
...There are several "Jimmy Gibsons" and the one that I thought was legit turned out to be an imposter. Oddly enough, Paul Bonnaci seems to have verified that this imposter was the real Jimmy who appeared with him on AMW.
Click to expand...

Well, that's intriguing! Did you ever have reason to suspect that, perhaps, your "Jimmy Gibson" might be a Bonacci "alter personality"?

I'm sorry to hear that you were toyed with and had your precious time & efforts wasted by someone playing identity games. I've always felt that you are one of the most sincere, caring and capable "sleuths" I've encountered on any forum. You, of all people, don't deserve to be mistreated in that manner.
 
GoBrewers said:
i saw the tv guide deal, i looked on the AMW website and there is a picture and a small amount of info

Mar 1993 "Jimmy" Gets Interviewed
"Jimmy stepped forward and was interviewed on AMW. While he never showed his face, Jimmy gave a lot of solid evidence. He spoke of his friendship with Johnny, showed evidence of branding he tells was a punishment for the boys, and even gave a diary he kept of his horrible experience. "

1992 Johnny's Story Airs On AMW: "Jimmy Steps Forward"
"AMW aired the Johnny Gosch story and with the help of Paul Bonacci several composite sketches were drawn of the principals he says were involved in the alleged pedophilia ring. After the show aired, Noreen Gosch received a 14 page letter from a boy named "Jimmy" who said the same men who had abducted her son had abducted him and he told her that Johnny was still alive. Noreen said he knew personal details about her son that had never before been released and she believes him. "
Click to expand...

If you haven't seen Shadowwraith's photobucket collection of news articles on the case, please go to WHTJ #3 thread, post #374, where the link is. The 1984 articles in particular may give you a very different perception of the case and the Gosch's roles in it. For example, there is an article wherein they are reported to have made a formal request that the FBI STOP investigating their son's disappearance. Noreen has stated that the FBI just refused to investigate the case at all, which is clearly untrue if Noreen & John asked them to stop their investigation of it!

Within a year of Johnny going missing, Noreen is contacted by Paul Bishop who tells her his is with a government agency investigating pedophile rings and that Johnny is definitely a victim of one. Subsequently, Noreen testifies before Arlen Spector's committee, in Congress, that Johnny was kidnapped by a pedophile ring.

Having given that testimoney, Noreen is then committed to that "solution" of the case. Johnny will be, for her, a symbol of all children victimized by pedophile rings and, since most remain faceless, nameless & voiceless to the public, she will "speak for them". She is therefore highly motivated to endorse and validate any informant who claims to be a witness to Johnny being victimized by a pedophile ring - since they in turn become validation of her own beliefs (and testimoney) about her son's fate. Would she publicly state that "Jimmy" said things to her about her son that no one could have known unless they really knew him, if that was not actually true, for this reason?
 
Max,

In John DeCamp's book, he reproduces a segment of a news article from 1991 in which he is quoted as saying that Paul Bonacci's account of the Gosch kidnapping "did not match up 90 percent, not 95 percent, not 98 percent, but 100 percent"
and that "A Nebraska inmate has provided details about the abduction of Johnny Gosch that only someone with firsthand knowledge could have had". Noreen Gosch is alleged to have verified this.

But I can't find these alleged detailed, fact-filled accounts in Bonacci's own words. They don't appear to exist. I found two accounts of the Gosch kidnapping in Bonacci's own words, transcript style, but neither of them contain any verifiable factual data at all! He doesn't talk about the street names, or what the buildings looked like on the street, he doesn't describe the vehicles involved - make, model, year, color - he doesn't talk about other people who might have been on the street, or if the sun was up, or what the weather was like...nothing of that nature. And certainly, he doesn't talk about what Johhny Gosch looked like or if he had unusual markings anywhere on his body.

I no longer believe that Paul Bonacci provided anyone with any factual data about the kidnapping. I believe others, including Noreen Gosch, have falsely claimed that Bonacci gave them such info, for their own purposes.
 
Roy Harrold said:
Max,

In John DeCamp's book, he reproduces a segment of a news article from 1991 in which he is quoted as saying that Paul Bonacci's account of the Gosch kidnapping "did not match up 90 percent, not 95 percent, not 98 percent, but 100 percent"
and that "A Nebraska inmate has provided details about the abduction of Johnny Gosch that only someone with firsthand knowledge could have had". Noreen Gosch is alleged to have verified this.

But I can't find these alleged detailed, fact-filled accounts in Bonacci's own words. They don't appear to exist. I found two accounts of the Gosch kidnapping in Bonacci's own words, transcript style, but neither of them contain any verifiable factual data at all! He doesn't talk about the street names, or what the buildings looked like on the street, he doesn't describe the vehicles involved - make, model, year, color - he doesn't talk about other people who might have been on the street, or if the sun was up, or what the weather was like...nothing of that nature. And certainly, he doesn't talk about what Johhny Gosch looked like or if he had unusual markings anywhere on his body.

I no longer believe that Paul Bonacci provided anyone with any factual data about the kidnapping. I believe others, including Noreen Gosch, have falsely claimed that Bonacci gave them such info, for their own purposes.
Click to expand...

Try: http://www.whale.to/b/bonacci.html

"I went up to him, asked him [Gosch] a question," said Bonacci. "At
that point he was close enough to the car where Tony [another
kidnapper] had pulled up in the van and they pushed him in the car
and they had a rag with chloroform in the bag that they had us
stick over his face. And then put it back in the bag after he was
out...We drove several miles...we met up with a station wagon and a
van several times."

After switching vehicles and changing direction, the kidnapping of
Johnny Gosch was over.

Text of actual judgement at the bottom of above link.
Click to expand...

http://www.operationfindachild.org/johnnygosch.html

Does the fact that he was a 14 year old boy at the time who has claimed he was abused by Larry King from the age of 6 and suffered at the hands of a multitude of pedophiles causing him to have at least 3 different known psychiatric disorders come into what he knows and what he as forgotten maybe?

There is some good information but a lot of "expired links at both

http://www.johnnygosch.com/default.htm

http://www.justiceforjohnnygosch.com/Home_Page.html - and

http://www.theforbiddenknowledge.com/hardtruth/ted_gunderson_report.htm
 
Spurser said:
Has everyone seen the latest picture posted on Noreen's website? Any thoughts on whether or not it's Johnny?

http://www.johnnygosch.com/images/jgsc.jpg
Click to expand...

I think it looks exactly like Johnny, and I'm assuming as Noreen has said that it is a photo of him post-abduction, it must not be a picture she's familiar with. I wonder if it's cropped, and if so, I'd love to see the rest because I like to look at backgrounds in these things. There are so many of these photos that use the same rooms, decorations, props, etc.

He appears to be wearing a necklace; in some other photos that aren't so obviously Johnny, the boy is wearing a necklace with a cross...I wonder if it's the same necklace. It would be something to connect the photos.

Edited to add: Looks like binding or a gag around his shoulders...

I can see being iffy on previous photos; I am myself. But this one seems pretty clear to me.
 
She hints, at the very least, that John Gosch Sr. (Leonard Gosch) had a hand in Johnny's abduction.
Click to expand...

Newcomer to this case! it is fascinating and baffling to say the least. What if anything was known about the Gosche's marriage and divorce? What was life like in the home before Johnny's abduction? Is Mr. Gosch still living now? and what has he said about all of this? Is "Leonard" his middle-name? How is the name "Leonard Gosch" derived out of John Sr? Or did he change his name?

I think there is just so much information that will never be known.

Satch
 
Satch said:
Newcomer to this case! it is fascinating and baffling to say the least. What if anything was known about the Gosche's marriage and divorce? What was life like in the home before Johnny's abduction? Is Mr. Gosch still living now? and what has he said about all of this? Is "Leonard" his middle-name? How is the name "Leonard Gosch" derived out of John Sr? Or did he change his name?

I think there is just so much information that will never be known.

Satch
Click to expand...

The only information I have about John Sr. (I think he is John Leonard Gosch; he goes by Leonard and John Jr. went by Johnny) comes from Noreen's Gosch's book, so it's fairly one-sided. You have to make your own judgments about it.

I did read somewhere recently that Leonard's response to Noreen's allegation that Johnny was still alive and had been with pedophiles until his escape was that he would not want to know his son if that were the case, that he would be "ruined." Again, this wasn't a direct quote, just something I read, so I don't know if it's true.

Also, I had a friend who lived in the area at the time, and she said the family was generally regarded as "weird" altogether. Her opinion was that Johnny never made it out of the area alive, and she hinted that the parents were somehow responsible.

Again, this is hearsay and rumor. The best thing to do is read what you can and make your own decisions.

What's your opinion about the photos?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

DNASolves

Who is Fairfield County Jane Doe (1993)?

Members online

... and 135 more.
Total: 336 (members: 136, guests: 200)

Online statistics

Members online
136
Guests online
200
Total visitors
336
Totals may include hidden visitors.

Forum statistics

Threads
608,916
Messages
18,247,650
Members
234,503
Latest member
quo2024
Back
Top