I'm beginning to agree with you, Roy. I now think (especially after hearing Florida investigator Nelson Zalva's comments on the photos) that the photos sent to Ms. Gosch do *not* show her son and that the boys in the photos are now grown up and safe (and hopefully leading normal lives despite posing for the creep who took the pictures).Roy Harrold said:What has never been found in such collections, (and the FBI and Interpol have 10's of thousands of seized images), is pornographic pictures of officially missing children. If there had been *advertiser censored* pictures of Johnny Gosch, it's inconceivable that they would not have been traded around and turned up in collections seized by police over the years.
It has been talked about on here and she does say that he came in the middle of the night or something and visited, showed her his birth mark to prove who he was....I will never find it too many posts, you'll have to weed through unless someone knows right where they are....there are many posts about this meeting.MistyGirl said:I have a question and if the answer is in here somewhre jsut direct me to the post. I was watching somethign last night that said Johnny's Mom received a visit from him & sient stranger when he would have been about 27 years old it was a very short meetin gand he left. Can any one tell me if this was indeed true & if there is anymore details about this meeting?
Mr Roy, I respectfully disagree based on your research presented, 5 cases that you found over a 5-6 yr period is not 'vigorously' being persued and prosecuted, IMO. Now, I have not researched myself, so I could be wrong, but what you researched doesn't prove to me that it's being vigorously persued or prosecuted.Roy Harrold said:Dr Doogie - I respectfully disagree. It seems to me that child *advertiser censored* is being vigorously persued & prosecuted. A few examples:
[warning! links may contain disturbing descriptions of child abuse]
Hi Maima - Thank you for taking the time to answer my question & for posting the links. I really apprecaite it.maima said:MistyGirl, Ms. Gosch's official Johnny Gosch website, www.johnnygosch.com, has only a brief mention of the visit. But you can get further detail here:http://www.dmregister.com/news/stories/c4788993/6798176.html (Des Moines Register article) and here: http://www.answers.com/topic/johnny-gosch (Answers.com).
There is no doubt that some cases are persued and prosecuted, the it seems to this lay-person that it has not made a dent in the production and distribution of this material. I probably was not as clear as I should have been: I believe that LE does seek to arrest those involved, it just is they only scrape the surface of the number of crimes committed (similar to drug dealers are busted, yet drugs are readily available to anyone who makes an effort to purchase them).Roy Harrold said:Dr Doogie - I respectfully disagree. It seems to me that child *advertiser censored* is being vigorously persued & prosecuted.
Roy Harrold said:2sisters - DocWho3 posted an analysis of the B&W photo showing only one boy, compared to the color version of the same photo found on the bondage site. It seems that the B&W photo was likely a copy of the color one, but someone has used Photoshop to add a "brand" to the arm of the boy, in the B&W copy. This would appear, by itself, to be an attempt to create a hoax - an attempt to create a photo intended to bolster claims made by "Franklin Cover-up" sources that children (Johnny Gosch specifically) were kidnapped and branded by an organized criminal conspiracy.
The B&W copy of the photo is definitely a hoax and an attempt to deceive.