1292 users online (210 members and 1082 guests)  


Websleuths News


Page 2 of 38 FirstFirst 1 2 3 4 12 ... LastLast
Results 16 to 30 of 560
  1. #16
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Posts
    312
    Mr rbeck - I'm doing my best to keep my temper under control while I type this. I'm frankly appalled that you would come to a place like this, where people are working on solving the disappearance of women and children, many of whom can be presumed to be the victims of sexual predators, and engage in not only defending convicted sex offenders but also blaming of victims.

    "Oh, it was her fault, she lied about her age" - I DON'T BELIEVE THAT!

    Gunderson does the same thing, in one of his radio shows on the subject of convicted sex offender Nelson. He goes into this outrageous chauvanistic rant - "Oh, it was nothing - you know how young girls can be, they'll do anything to get their picture taken by a professional photographer" - disgusting nonsense!

    Rothstein also, in one of the radio braodcasts, tries to exonerate Ritter of Covenent house - "oh, no, he was totally innocent" - bah humbug! It's true that Ritter was not convicted, but the internal investigation by Covenent house concluded that Ritter had engaged in sexual acts with runaway boys served by that facility.

    This theme, of defending and excusing sex offenders is very offensive to me. It also convinces me that the whole Franklin tale is a pack of lies.

  2. #17
    Join Date
    Aug 2004
    Posts
    2,959
    Quote Originally Posted by Roy Harrold View Post
    Mr rbeck - I'm doing my best to keep my temper under control while I type this. I'm frankly appalled that you would come to a place like this, where people are working on solving the disappearance of women and children, many of whom can be presumed to be the victims of sexual predators, and engage in not only defending convicted sex offenders but also blaming of victims.

    "Oh, it was her fault, she lied about her age" - I DON'T BELIEVE THAT!

    Gunderson does the same thing, in one of his radio shows on the subject of convicted sex offender Nelson. He goes into this outrageous chauvanistic rant - "Oh, it was nothing - you know how young girls can be, they'll do anything to get their picture taken by a professional photographer" - disgusting nonsense!

    Rothstein also, in one of the radio braodcasts, tries to exonerate Ritter of Covenent house - "oh, no, he was totally innocent" - bah humbug! It's true that Ritter was not convicted, but the internal investigation by Covenent house concluded that Ritter had engaged in sexual acts with runaway boys served by that facility.

    This theme, of defending and excusing sex offenders is very offensive to me. It also convinces me that the whole Franklin tale is a pack of lies.
    Well said!

  3. #18
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    Mid Mon Valley, PA
    Posts
    236
    Quote Originally Posted by 2sisters View Post
    Well said!
    I'll second that. Roy, I know you took a break for a while, please stick around this time m'kay?

  4. #19
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Posts
    38
    Delurking to put in my own 2 cents.

    I currently sit on the fence as far as whether the Franklin Case and Johnny Gosch are connected. I'm still trying to sort everything out and I very much appreciate the information provided by ALL posters.

    However, it's obvious to me that whenever certain aspects of this case are brought up, there are a couple of people that try to shut down the conversation. Why is that? I realize those people have already made up their OWN mind about things but why do they try and prevent the rest of us from doing the same?

    If someone brings up something that I already know or if they start going down a path that I've already discounted, it's really not that hard for me to skip that post or ignore that poster. This website is not a news outlet or a court room. It's a DISCUSSION board! Please let the discussion continue!

  5. #20
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Posts
    312
    Why is that? asks WSTarheel?

    Because it's not conversation, it's 'evangelism' and spamming that involves reams of unsubstantiated libel. Much of it, frankly, is Christian Patriot Militia propaganda.

    There are already at least three threads on this site, on this subject, that each run for 26 pages. If you plug "franklin cover-up" into google you can access hundreds of webpages on the topic, all of them repeating the same "information" over & over again. You really need to see it dissected again, to "make up your mind"?

    I went from a lurker to a poster, years ago, because the Gosch threads on this site were being abused. The terms of service for Websleuths prevent me from discussing the details of exactly how they were being abused, and I intend to honor that, but that's how I became an active poster.

    You are right, however, that it's not my place to decide if a given posting is spam or not. Perhaps I should relent and just let "the conversation" flow wherever it will, eh?

    Ok. But I reserve the right to confront & debunk (respectfully) all false statements, in detail.
    Last edited by christine2448; 03-30-2008 at 01:18 AM. Reason: removed, then changed mind and replaced

  6. #21
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Posts
    38
    Thank you RBeck on the information about Rusty Nelson. I had not heard this information about what he was arrested for before. Interesting...

    In his testimony on the Franklin Case, Rusty Nelson stated that King hired two photographers. Nelson would take the legit photos and the other person took the porn pictures. Nelson stated that the other person impersonated him and that he was "set up" as a fall guy. His testimony set off a "red flag" for me. At the time, I wondered if Rusty was actually more involved (taking the porn pictures himself) and he was laying groundwork to cover his own tracks.

    Some time later, I listened to the Bonacci interviews, where Bonacci names his molesters. Bonacci stated that there was a photographer that molested him named Rusty Nelson. Hmmm... Was it REALLY Rusty Nelson or the impersonator?

    When I read that Nelson was arrested for child pornography, I automatically assumed that my initial thoughts on the case were correct - that Nelson probably WAS Kings porn photographer.

    Now I don't know what to believe... need to do more research.

    Whether or not Rusty Nelson is a pedophile, the jury is still out as far as I'm concerned. But, I DO believe that he holds some key information in this case.

  7. #22
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Posts
    312
    Quote Originally Posted by WSTarheel View Post
    Thank you RBeck on the information about Rusty Nelson. I had not heard this information about what he was arrested for before. Interesting...

    In his testimony on the Franklin Case, Rusty Nelson stated that King hired two photographers. Nelson would take the legit photos and the other person took the porn pictures. Nelson stated that the other person impersonated him and that he was "set up" as a fall guy. His testimony set off a "red flag" for me. At the time, I wondered if Rusty was actually more involved (taking the porn pictures himself) and he was laying groundwork to cover his own tracks.
    There are no "Franklin" porn pictures. There never were any. None have ever surfaced. Of the hundreds of thousands of child porn pictures seized by American Customs, FBI and other law enforcement from the 1960s to the present day, none have ever been proven to depict Johnny Gosch, Paul Bonacci or any of the men Bonacci claims to have been involved with.

    Quote Originally Posted by WSTarheel View Post
    Some time later, I listened to the Bonacci interviews, where Bonacci names his molesters. Bonacci stated that there was a photographer that molested him named Rusty Nelson. Hmmm... Was it REALLY Rusty Nelson or the impersonator?

    When I read that Nelson was arrested for child pornography, I automatically assumed that my initial thoughts on the case were correct - that Nelson probably WAS Kings porn photographer.

    Now I don't know what to believe... need to do more research.

    Whether or not Rusty Nelson is a pedophile, the jury is still out as far as I'm concerned. But, I DO believe that he holds some key information in this case.
    Rusty Nelson is a convicted child pornographer, and no BS stories about "impersonators" can ever change that fact.

  8. #23
    Join Date
    Aug 2005
    Location
    The South, USA
    Posts
    2,405
    So many "what ifs" and "could haves" and "maybes" get in the way of the true facts, I think. What do we know?

    -- Johnny went out early in the morning on a Sunday to deliver papers.
    -- He was usually accompanied by his dad; this was his first time alone.
    -- He was seen by another paper carrier sitting on the grass, folding papers.
    -- He was seen by another paper carrier talking to a man in a (blue?) sedan; Johnny said, "That guy is weird. I'm going home."

    What else do we know for sure?

  9. #24
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Posts
    38
    Ok. But I reserve the right to confront & debunk (respectfully) all false statements, in detail.

    Roy - Absolutely! Like I said, ALL posters should be allowed to discuss and contribute. How can this be a discussion if only one theory is allowed to be presented?

  10. #25
    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Location
    Northern California
    Posts
    2,437
    I must differ from Roy's position somewhat. It would make sense that if you want to find out the workings of a pedophile ring, it would require the testimony of some of those insiders. These accomplaice/whistler-blowers should not be raised up as heroes, but their stories should not be dismissed simply because they are also guilty of the same crimes. That is, if there was a conspiracy...

    Conspiracies do exist, but not all conspiracy theories are true. As a general rule of thumb, the larger the suspected conspiracy, the more likely that it is false. And the idea that the Federal Government and the military are in cahoots with Satanists and local pedophiles to maintain a stable of child sex-slaves for the global elite is about as big as they come.
    Order the book "Searching For Anna" directly from [URL="http://www.lulu.com/conte


  11. #26
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Posts
    312
    Doogie - here's the "Jimmy Gibson" info that you were confused about:

    On the Des Moines Register blogsite, there is a claim to responsibility for sending the photos to people associated with Noreen Gosch and the conspiracy theories about her son over the years:

    http://blogs.dmregister.com/?p=2317


    "Hi my name is Jimmy Gibson. I am writing you to tell my side of the recent development.
    About 3 weeks ago I recieved 3 photos to my email, I do not know who sent them nor do I know where they came from, it was a anom email account probably sent froma proxy server. I was quite shocked when I saw them and debated on wether I should send them to Noreen Gosch or not. Yes the photos indeed look like it could be Johnny Gosch but like everything in this world you are never really sure. So I thought about it for a while and then I edventually sent them to a contact of Noreen Gosch, Tim White who has been working with her on this case.
    I went back to the email and looked and one of the images was not an actual copy but a image linked pic. So I traced the image back to the url (Which appears below)"

    I will not reproduce the URL, as the writer above claims the website contains pornography. He goes on to say:

    "I only emailed them to Tim White and Michael Corbin. As far as the images being found on Noreen’s doorstep I have not a clue.
    From what I know, Tim White emailed them to everybody he could think of, Decamp/Gosch and so on and who knows how many other people. I believe Mr. White blew this whole thing out of proportion and acted irresponsible"

  12. #27
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Posts
    312

    Theories

    Quote Originally Posted by WSTarheel View Post
    Ok. But I reserve the right to confront & debunk (respectfully) all false statements, in detail.

    Roy - Absolutely! Like I said, ALL posters should be allowed to discuss and contribute. How can this be a discussion if only one theory is allowed to be presented?
    Ok. Here's a theory for you:

    After going through all the publicly available info relating to the Gosch case, in the wake of the Gosch=Gannon farce, and systematically stripping away everything that was not a verifiable & undisputed fact - I was left with Paul Bonacci's confession of involvement in kidnapping and sexually assaulting Johnny Gosch. (The confession is a fact, not necessarily anything contained in the confession)

    I was discussing this with some friends and it occurred to me - what if some elements of Bonacci's confession were descriptions of real events, but other elements were not?

    What if Bonacci had a need to relieve psychological pressure by confessing his participation in horrific crimes, but was
    a) minimizing his own responsibility by weaving his confessions into a tale in which he himself would appear to have been "a helpless victim"
    b) masking the identity of the real participants (and victims) in the crimes by making them fantasy characters or real, public figures that actually had nothing to do with the crimes?

    This is a known phenomenon. People who commit horrific acts have been known to confess to them in convoluted ways, minimizing their own responsibility and sometimes burying the true facts within elaborate fantasies that can never be corroborated.

    So what if some of Bonacci's description of the kidnapping of Gosch and his own involvement in it was factual - enough for him to be 'sincere' when he meets Noreen Gosch and sobs out how sorry he is, and get the relief of pressure he needs - but the identities of his real accomplices in the deed are being masked or hidden in that confession? For example, what if the real "pedophile ring" Bonacci was involved in was actually himself and some older friends...like Troy Boner, Boner's older brother and possibly Alisha Owen's older brother?

    What if the rape & murder of a boy described by Bonacci as happening at Bohemian Grove, actually happened somewhere in Nebraska or Iowa? What if the victim was not some unknown, random boy, but was really Johnny Gosch or Eugene Martin?

    What if Paul Bonacci, who has readily admitted to be mentally ill, is really far more disturbed than even the people closest to him since he made his 'confession', realize?

    What if he is a psychopath who has been playing John DeCamp, Ted Gunderson & Noreen Gosch like fiddles for years - all thw while chuckling to himself in some dark corner of his person that he has so tightly wrapped up that even those closest to him never see it? What if the fox has been hiding safely in the henhouse all these years?

    I'm sure that all these people would say - but Paul's not like that! Well, Gacy wasn't "like that", Bundy wasn't "like that", Gary Ridgeway wasn't "like that" either.

  13. #28
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Posts
    312
    There's also Barbara Hartwell's theory that John DeCamp and Ted Gunderson are the real masterminds of an inter-continental child sex slavery ring and the whole Franklin Coverup story is an elaboarate smokescreen designed to hide their own involvement...

  14. #29
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Posts
    38
    Roy - I've gone down the exact same path that you have. Bonacci
    CONFESSED to the kidnapping of Johnny. He also CONFESSED to some other very sick crimes! Why isn't his testimony made public? Why wasn't he charged for the crimes that he admitted to? Things that make me go hmmmm...

  15. #30
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Posts
    38
    Quote Originally Posted by Roy Harrold View Post
    There's also Barbara Hartwell's theory that John DeCamp and Ted Gunderson are the real masterminds of an inter-continental child sex slavery ring and the whole Franklin Coverup story is an elaboarate smokescreen designed to hide their own involvement...
    That theory has crossed my mind too. But, why would they continue their efforts to keep the case "active" instead of just letting it die? Doesn't make any sense to me why they would keep this case in the spotlight if they had something to hide.

Page 2 of 38 FirstFirst 1 2 3 4 12 ... LastLast


Similar Threads

  1. Replies: 561
    Last Post: 10-12-2017, 05:42 PM
  2. IA John David Gosch (12) - West Des Moines IA, 1982
    By sweetpea657 in forum Missing Children in America - A Profile
    Replies: 1
    Last Post: 04-06-2010, 03:57 PM
  3. Replies: 666
    Last Post: 03-27-2008, 05:08 PM
  4. Replies: 291
    Last Post: 12-09-2007, 01:37 PM
  5. Replies: 705
    Last Post: 09-27-2006, 12:22 PM

Tags for this Thread