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

Status
Not open for further replies.

Insguru

New Member
Joined
Sep 27, 2006
Messages
59
Reaction score
0
2sisters said:
But many also feel that Noreen has no credibility. i mean come on, now there are Noreen impostors? To be perfectly honest, neither parents are very credible to me. What info was mr. Gosch hiding? are you accusing him of being in on the "pedo ring" and orchestrating this who thing?
I don't necessarily buy into "rings" either and I have pretty much decided the Federal gov't is not behind this. I will not rule out that the perp(s) of this crime may have worked for the gov't as their day job.

It seems to be fact that on at least one occassion, he did have another lady pose as his wife during an informational meeting. Both Noreen and attorney Decamp acknowledge this separately. I don't think this is in dispute, but I also don't know that it, in and of itself, it is meaningful. I do think it speaks to his ability to be minipulative in certain situations. Could be something as simple as "I promised them we would both be there and she's such a crackpot, I better find someone else to accompany me." to .."I don't want her to hear the information, or find out about the information, so I'll have someone play her part, and maybe the information will never come to her attention." I really don't have an idea why he would do this or if it even means anything. Neither of the above would necessarily implicate him in any involvement, no more than the supposed (I say supposed because we have no evidence beyond Noreen until the police files can be opened) 30 second phone call that happened during the night from Sioux City, Iowa that he answered and was supposedly a "wrong number." Again, we seem to get most of our information from Decamp and Noreen and these oddball websites, that tend to repeat information from Decamp and Noreen. If the police would release some of the case files, we would at least have a third party view of things.
 

Insguru

New Member
Joined
Sep 27, 2006
Messages
59
Reaction score
0
2sisters said:
all of this energy is being focused on this government run pedophile operation but why? i am sorry to say but i just don't think it is likely. Johnny has more that likely been dead since his abduction and all anyone cares about it this pedo ring and all these years a child killer has walked free b/c everyone is looking for an imaginary child pornagrahy ring. Can we please get this thread back to the abduction of jonny gosch and put the conspracy theories on another thread b/c it is taking focus off of Johnny Gosch.
I think for the most part, this thread is on task, in terms of focusing on the perp.

And you are right, we seem to have a child abductor that has been walking around since 1981 (although i'm open to the idea that he may have served time for other charges as thess guys have a habit of getting caught/accused eventually of something).

I also think it is possible that this same perp(s) took one or two other kids from the "area" and they ended up with the same fate as Johnny. IMHO, perps who commit crimes successfully, often continue to commit crimes. If he was abducted, molested and then killed, I seriously doubt he was the first or last child the perp was involved with.
 

beakiebean

New Member
Joined
Aug 13, 2005
Messages
354
Reaction score
3
Insguru said:
Neither of the above would necessarily implicate him in any involvement, no more than the supposed (I say supposed because we have no evidence beyond Noreen until the police files can be opened) 30 second phone call that happened during the night from Sioux City, Iowa that he answered and was supposedly a "wrong number."
I guess I don't see why a 30 second phone call in the middle of the night can't be a wrong number. If you called our house at say 2 am everyone would be asleep. I'd hear the phone ring, fumble around in the dark for it. Once I got it off the hook and dragged it over to my ear I'd say hello 2 or 3 times if there was no response. Once I decided no one was there or if someone on the other line said it was a wrong number I'd fumble around in the dark trying to hang up the phone in the dark without turning the light on because then I'd be totally awake. I can see how that could easily take 30 seconds-and I'm moderately coherent when you wake me up. If you got my DH-he'd probably fall asleep with the phone to his ear and it would be a 3 hour call!
 

Insguru

New Member
Joined
Sep 27, 2006
Messages
59
Reaction score
0
beakiebean said:
I guess I don't see why a 30 second phone call in the middle of the night can't be a wrong number. If you called our house at say 2 am everyone would be asleep. I'd hear the phone ring, fumble around in the dark for it. Once I got it off the hook and dragged it over to my ear I'd say hello 2 or 3 times if there was no response. Once I decided no one was there or if someone on the other line said it was a wrong number I'd fumble around in the dark trying to hang up the phone in the dark without turning the light on because then I'd be totally awake. I can see how that could easily take 30 seconds-and I'm moderately coherent when you wake me up. If you got my DH-he'd probably fall asleep with the phone to his ear and it would be a 3 hour call!
I hear you (no pun intended!). It might not be meaningful at all, or it could be. According to what i've read (again, this is coming only from the aforementioned parties), there were several calls that week, during the night. I still say 30 seconds seems a bit long for a wrong number. Try it yourself. This was supposedly a wrong number, not a hang up. Again though, we can't seem to get any official documentation. I hate focusing on such minor details that can't be verified by at least "somewhat reliable" sources, but there is very, very little real information out there and it tends to make every little thing that we hear of become a focus.
 

beakiebean

New Member
Joined
Aug 13, 2005
Messages
354
Reaction score
3
Insguru said:
Again though, we can't seem to get any official documentation. I hate focusing on such minor details that can't be verified by at least "somewhat reliable" sources, but there is very, very little real information out there and it tends to make every little thing that we hear of become a focus.
It's maddening isn't it? I wish we know what the WDM police department thought about it-and what they thought was signifigant. It would be so nice to get a feel for what they thought happened or didn't happen. All the info seems to come from one camp and it's so hard to judge credibility in this case.

Becca
 

Roy Harrold

New Member
Joined
Sep 13, 2006
Messages
312
Reaction score
9
Some people are skeptical of the idea that teenagers can be murderous sexual predators all on their own - without being manipulated by adults or controlled by some kind of pedophile "ring".

Those skeptics should find this BBC news story educational:

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/england/manchester/6045672.stm

Teen sex offenders living in the area around the Nebraska-Iowa border at the time of Gosch's disappearance cannot be dismissed as suspects.
 

inquiringmindz

Active Member
Joined
Aug 10, 2004
Messages
621
Reaction score
216
I have never requested information through the Freedom of Information Act. Would the WDMPD give out the older info or would they not based on the fact it is an ongoing investigation?
 

KJERVIS

New Member
Joined
Jun 30, 2006
Messages
116
Reaction score
3
In my opinion I do not think Noreen is a reliable source for information, much as Doc has mentioned numerous times. I mean no disrespect on what I am about to say but I feel it must be said. My medical background is in internal medicine not psychiatrics so Im certainly not an authority; however this women displays classical symptoms of a fictitious disorder. The one most people hear about is Munchausen by proxy, which is where a caregiver inflicts injury on a child in order to receive attention, the end result of course is death of the child in the event that pattern behaviour is not identified in the caregiver. What sort of childhood illness record did Johnny have? Im not saying Noreen has MbP but she could very well have a fictitious disorder of some kind. She is continuing to receive attention from her child’s suffering (real or imagined) the only difference is her child is not present but she continues to use him as a source. It’s something to think of anyway. But I would like to stress that I do not think she is a reliable source of information nor anyone who is in conjunction with her website. I also think the mother needs to be more closely looked at due to her unusual behaviour both shortly after and in the long term.

edited: spelling
 

2sisters

New Member
Joined
Aug 21, 2004
Messages
2,959
Reaction score
84
It would be hard to verify illnesses since it seems like Johnny didn't even exist until he was gone. i will explain, I have never heard (even on his mother's website) what kind of boy he was. Was he kind? Did he like animals? What did he do for fun? what made him get a paper route etc? Am i the only one who thinks that is weird. She never talks of him, only the pedo thing. KJARVIS, don't worry about your post everyone is entitled to their opinion on this case.

http://www.johnnygosch.com/default.htm
whats going on here, i thought the photos were proven to be a hoax?
 

Dr. Doogie

Well-Known Member
Joined
Apr 19, 2005
Messages
2,445
Reaction score
88
2sisters said:
http://www.johnnygosch.com/default.htm
whats going on here, i thought the photos were proven to be a hoax?
A LE investigator claims that he had the picture of the three boys in his possesion in the late 1970's (prior to JG's disappearance) and was able to identify them. He stated that the picture was a staged "shoot" with no harm coming to the boys (none of which were JG). However, he and his department have not been able to locate his notes from the investigation in order to confirm his recollections.

The "no conspiracy" believers say that this means that there is no JG connection to the pictures. The "conspiracy" believers say that since the notes cannot be located, his recollections are suspect and they still believe the pictures to be JG. Noreen appears to have taken this position.

It all hinges on what your definition of "proven" is.
 

Mr. E

Well-Known Member
Joined
Aug 20, 2005
Messages
2,406
Reaction score
122
Still, this new picture and the old black and white one (the one I believe was originally in color) clearly look like Johnny Gosch. I'm willing to believe that the photo with the three boys (the staged photo?) is a hoax, but the kid in these other pictures 1) is wearing what Johnny was wearing when he disappeared -- warm-up pants, 2) resembles Johnny, 3) looks like he is pretty tightly tied up, and 4) looks totally drugged out.

I'm not sure I buy the conspiracy theory, although anything is possible, I guess, but why do we have to discount those pictures if we discount that theory? Until it can be proven that those boys aren't Johnny, I just can't get past the resemblence.
 

docwho3

New Member
Joined
Oct 2, 2005
Messages
2,710
Reaction score
107
Mr. E said:
Still, this new picture and the old black and white one (the one I believe was originally in color) clearly look like Johnny Gosch. I'm willing to believe that the photo with the three boys (the staged photo?) is a hoax, but the kid in these other pictures 1) is wearing what Johnny was wearing when he disappeared -- warm-up pants, 2) resembles Johnny, 3) looks like he is pretty tightly tied up, and 4) looks totally drugged out.

I'm not sure I buy the conspiracy theory, although anything is possible, I guess, but why do we have to discount those pictures if we discount that theory? Until it can be proven that those boys aren't Johnny, I just can't get past the resemblence.
Actually the black & white pic of the single boy with a brand on his arm is the tampered-with image but that throws into doubt the color one of the 3 boys too and it was claimed the 3 boys pic was staged (I am not clear if the same claim was made about the single boy pic also or not but it was tampered with.) You don't have to discount the pictures. I myself consider them suspect though due to the fact that some tampering was done on one pic and both came from the same source and due to the fact that they were brought to light through noreen who is herself not reliable for the reasons I have outlined before in previous posts.

Even so I think it would be great to track down who has been posting the pics (Something I think L.E. can get done if they feel the need to do it.) and try to find who was actually in the pics. If the retired L.E. is right the pics were staged and no one was ever in danger even though they appear to be scared and endangered in the picture. However if anyone wishes to find out who took the pics (within the premise of this thread) and who appeared in them and make the info and proofs public I think it would be great and L.E. would probably find it interesting too. Also, I noticed that earlier the johnny2 thread was reopened which probably would also allow for consideration of the pics there as part of their wider scope of discussion, (which would mean that between the work of people on the two threads within each thread's premise no thoughts about the pics would be left unconsidered.)

This picture issue is just one more reason why I think we need a multi thread case status so we can have a thread on that issue alone as the investigation could take many posts and a long time unless L.E. begins to make public their look into the pics.
 

Insguru

New Member
Joined
Sep 27, 2006
Messages
59
Reaction score
0
2sisters said:
It would be hard to verify illnesses since it seems like Johnny didn't even exist until he was gone. i will explain, I have never heard (even on his mother's website) what kind of boy he was. Was he kind? Did he like animals? What did he do for fun? what made him get a paper route etc? Am i the only one who thinks that is weird. She never talks of him, only the pedo thing. KJARVIS, don't worry about your post everyone is entitled to their opinion on this case.

http://www.johnnygosch.com/default.htm
whats going on here, i thought the photos were proven to be a hoax?
The pictures were not proven to be a hoax. Only the one with the three boys were thought by one investigator in Florida, so be part of a case he investigated in the late 1970's. We have no such similar information about the one showing "Johnny" alone wearing sweats, or in the second picture showing "Johnny" wearing sweats. Don't forget about the intersting pic with the "guy" that may be dead or sleeping. We know nothing about him either. He seems to resemble the police sketch of the Jacob W. abductor, which was posted earlier with a link.

I have said before and will say again, I'm having trouble coming to the conclusion that the pics are him. I would like to defer to Noreen, just among us sleuths here, I am not convinced the hairline or eyebrows are the same. Also not sure about his complexion being the same. It could be him, its close. Does anyone else have an opinion? and why do you think what you think??

I have no idea about him personally as you said so well in your post. I know he was ambitious as he won awards for signing up customers and was very proud of this. He won a free airline ticket I believe. I assume he enjoyed pets as he had a dog that apparently did go with him on the paper route. Someone has now hurt him.
 

docwho3

New Member
Joined
Oct 2, 2005
Messages
2,710
Reaction score
107
Insguru said:
The pictures were not proven to be a hoax. . .
(Not arguing, just being clear about the qualities of the pic for clarity.)
If by "proven to be a hoax" you mean that the retired L.E. was unable to yet find the file records of the case that is true. But the black&white pic of the single boy was tampered with to the degree that it was found to be in a color format on another website and had no "brand" on the arm. This means someone made a color image into a black and white one and added a brand to the arm of the boy.
(Again, not arguing, just being clear about the qualities of the pic for clarity.)
Was the colored untampered image staged or true before it was sent to noreen? I don't know and I think that angle of things needs to be looked into but someone using the image for the gosch case in which the tampered version was what was presented is concerning.

Edited to add: I just read an interesting post in the johnny 2 thread about the pic of the 3 boys being not johnny and proven to have been not johnny - if that helps.
http://www.websleuths.com/forums/showpost.php?p=1210312&postcount=159
 

Insguru

New Member
Joined
Sep 27, 2006
Messages
59
Reaction score
0
docwho3 said:
(Not arguing, just being clear about the qualities of the pic for clarity.)
If by "proven to be a hoax" you mean that the retired L.E. was unable to yet find the file records of the case that is true. But the black&white pic of the single boy was tampered with to the degree that it was found to be in a color format on another website and had no "brand" on the arm. This means someone made a color image into a black and white one and added a brand to the arm of the boy.
(Again, not arguing, just being clear about the qualities of the pic for clarity.)
Was the colored untampered image staged or true before it was sent to noreen? I don't know and I think that angle of things needs to be looked into but someone using the image for the gosch case in which the tampered version was what was presented is concerning.

Edited to add: I just read an interesting post in the johnny 2 thread about the pic of the 3 boys being not johnny and proven to have been not johnny - if that helps.
http://www.websleuths.com/forums/showpost.php?p=1210312&postcount=159
Doc,

I agree with you on the above. I also want us to be clear and narrow things down as it relates to the pictures. It looks like we can now discount the picture of the 3 boys. Thats great. I don't think from careful reading of various articles and information, that any LE or former LE in Florida or Iowa has made any claims discounting the single boy pictures.

I understand what youre saying about the alterations of the original color picture to a black and white, with someone taking a marker and altering it. It does make the "original" of this picture, suspect.

But the original color picture (and the second one that was released) could as you point out, be altered themselves, or they could be untouched. I think at this point those are the two pictures that Noreen says are Johnny (since I think she has acknowledged that the one of the 3 boys does not depict him).

As I focus on those two pictures, they are clearly to me the same boy. I just cannot quite, in my mind, determine if its Johnny or not. Again, they are close, and it could be, and I was hoping to hear other's opinions.

And I still don't understand the picture of the man on the other picture. I wish we could discount all the pictures (or prove them to be him), and maybe we will indeed get to that point soon one way or the other.
 

HeartofTexas

New Member
Joined
Apr 8, 2005
Messages
4,320
Reaction score
24
Insguru: The pictures were not proven to be a hoax. Only the one with the three boys were thought by one investigator in Florida, so be part of a case he investigated in the late 1970's. We have no such similar information about the one showing "Johnny" alone wearing sweats, or in the second picture showing "Johnny" wearing sweats. Don't forget about the intersting pic with the "guy" that may be dead or sleeping. We know nothing about him either. He seems to resemble the police sketch of the Jacob W. abductor, which was posted earlier with a link.
I agree, Insguru. The one thing I can't account for in the pix that I believe to be Johnny are the white knuckles. If the pictures were staged then I think the child would be more relaxed and thus no noticeable white knuckles. The fact that the knuckles are so noticeable means, IMO, that the pictures are real. JMHO.
 

loganone

Member
Joined
Sep 15, 2006
Messages
59
Reaction score
2
HeartofTexas said:
I agree, Insguru. The one thing I can't account for in the pix that I believe to be Johnny are the white knuckles. If the pictures were staged then I think the child would be more relaxed and thus no noticeable white knuckles. The fact that the knuckles are so noticeable means, IMO, that the pictures are real. JMHO.
This is where I get kinda conflicted. I agree that I don't think this is a staged photo. But I noticed that I did a relaxed closed fist on my hand, and my knuckles turned white :) , which doesn't prove anything really. I also noticed that in the photo, it seems the rope on the wrists is not bound tight, like the rope on the ankles, this could be from struggling though.

I really think the look of terror on the boys face is all to real though. Just looking at the photo with the 3 boys, they don't seem to display the same type of terror look, IMHO.
 

Rhett

Active Member
Joined
Nov 16, 2005
Messages
360
Reaction score
47
Did anyone notice in the most recent picture of "Johnny" on Noreen's website the picture under the table. It looks like a sketch of a boy. Like maybe a missing poster image of Johnny that the perp brought back to torment Johnny. Let me know what you think. I have been lurking for a long time and finally got registered. You guys are great!
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top