Interesting, I will also add that the color processing in this photo appears to be consistent with film of the 1970s. The clothes-styles and hair styles of the boys are also consistent with the 1970s.
May I also point out once again, that David Leonard Johnson is alleged to have been kidnapped on April 1, 1985. Johnny Gosch disappeared on September 5, 1982, over two and a half years BEFORE the alleged disappearance of David Johnson.
David Leonard Johnson was born May 2, 1972.
Johnny Gosch was born Nov. 12, 1969, which is an age difference of about two and a half years.
Which would mean if the boy on the right is 13 that the boy in the middle is 10 or 11 years old.
If the boy in the middle is 13, then the boy on the right would be 15 or 16 years old.
Am I making my point here?
P.S. April 1, 2005 would have been April Fool's Day, just a coincidence? Or maybe someone is trying to tell us something.
Specifically according to the testimony of Noreen Gosch who has stated publicly that she believes the picture was taken within a short period of time after Johnny's disappearance.
Clearly, that is impossible, if David Johnson was not even allegedly abducted until over two and a half years later.
But, just for the sake of lunacy, let's just assume the picture was taken in April of 1985, the same month as the alleged abduction of David Johnson.
That would make the boy in the middle almost 13 years old, and the boy on the right, allegedly Johnny Gosch, 15 and a half years old.
Does the boy on the right look 15 and a half years old? Johnny also looked older than he was. So if the boy on he right is really 15 and a half years old, if it is Johnny we would expect him to look even older than 15, not younger.
Now people might start to understand why we came to another website NOT controlled by Noreen Gosch.
Her "facts" just don't add up.
To me, out of the three boys, the boy on the far left appears to be the younger, I would estimate about nine or ten years old. The two other boys, appear to me to be about the same age (Approximately 12 years old) and therefore can not be both David Johnson and Johnny Gosch.
It will be interesting to see if Noreen cleans up her website and cleans up her facts, as a result of our message board and our posts. Even though we've already been accused of being the ones who say things without any evidence to back it up.
You decide who has the evidence.
Love, Darron
-- Edited by The Phantom on Saturday 17th of October 2009 02:06:01 PM
__________________
"Sometimes when you open your mind to the impossible, you discover the truth." Walter from Fringe.
Well I just took a look at Noreen's website. Like I said I haven't visited her website in a while. I can see now that she is no longer claiming that the boy in the middle is David Johnson, although that was clearly stated the last time I checked a few months ago. Finally she figured out that the math just doesn't add up. She should have realised that before she even put the concocted story up on her web page.
She does however still have the picture of the now proven falsified BRAND, digitally inserted into THE SAME picture that she now admits was in the public domain (without the brand) [see below]
Love, Darron
P.S. She now has a link to alleged images on what she says is a "pedo" sight called Jacob's Tales. She claims that the links will take you to photo albums of young boys.
I checked out the links, and it does link to a website called Jacob's Tales, but the site claims there are 0 pictures of minors on the site and that the site has no affiliation with the previous website called Jacob's Tales (insinuating I think that there used to be a website of this nature)
Noreen claims that the one of the pictures of Johnny Gosch tied up was seen on this website.
I thought she claimed that the photos were delivered to her door step?
Now we have evidence that at least one of these photos could have been obtained from the public domain, and most likely all of them were. Convenient now that the original web site is gone, so no one can go there and see if ALL of the bondage photos may have come from this web site.
I have included the images here for reference, although I edited one for content. Noreen's site is starting to look like a pedo site itself, and those pictures were too much. Although they are not sexually explicit. (I would never click on a link to sexually explicit pictures of minors.) certainly they are in very bad taste.
-- Edited by The Phantom on Saturday 17th of October 2009 03:22:05 PM
Yes, I encountered that post on Web Sleuths myself, and it did verify your claim that Patricia's son's alleged abduction could not be found in any law enforcement database by others before us.
Love, Darron
__________________
"Sometimes when you open your mind to the impossible, you discover the truth." Walter from Fringe.
