-Caveat Lector- from: http://www.cia-drugs.com/Franklin/index.html An interesting Federal Court proceedings. Om K ----- DeCamp Legal Services, P.C. Legal - Public Relations - Lobbying 414 So. 11th Street Lincoln, NE 68508 Fax: (402) 477-4487 Phone: (402) 477-3974 E-Mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Attorneys at Law John W. DeCamp John E. Beltzer Antonio E. Bendezu Steven A. Montag Of Counsel: Richard J. Mahlin February 25, 1999 To Whom It Concerns: The trial on February 5, 1999 resulted in a million dollar judgement. I believe that judgement, completely independent of the Default Judgement in the case because the singular issue was damages, makes it clear that the evidence presented was credible and Judge Urbom acted on that basis and to send a message to a number of individuals (both clean and dirty) who were a part of the Franklin saga. I believe the U.S. Attorney has no choice but to either CHARGE THE WITNESSES WITH PERJURY HAVING TESTIFIED UNDER OATH IN A FEDERAL COURT ON VERY MATERIAL MATTERS (From Murder to Bribery to Perjury to the most vile corruption involving young people) OR, THE U.S. ATTORNEY HAS AN OBLIGATION TO INIVESTIGATE. FURTHER INTO THE FXANKLIM SAGA AND REOPEN MATTERS This time there ARE PICTURES. This time RUSTY NELSON exsists and testified completely contrary to Chief Wadman's testimony under oath to the legislature. This time Noreen Gosch validated the credibility and story of Paul Bonacci... and a lot, lot more. At minimum some Federal or State authority (Whether it is a Judge. Attorney General. Prosecutor. etc.) has an obligation to reopen particularly the Alisha Owen case. If my witnesses in Court on February 3, 1999 are telling the truth, then Alisha Owen is also. If Alishn Owen is LYING, as a jury said then my witnesses are lying, It appears to me to put the U.S. Attorney and Nebraska Attomey General and Judicial System on the horns of a dilemma - and failure to act would to me at least appear to be deliberate obstruction of justice at a minimum. Respectfully, John W. DeCamp DeCampr Legal Services ===== FILED US DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT FO NEBRASKA 99 F E B 22 AM 8 : 14 GARY D MCFARLAND CLERK IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF NEBRASKA PAUL A. BONACCI, 4:CV91-33037 Plaintiff, vs. MEMORANDUM OF DECISION LAWRENICE E. KING, Defendant. On February 27, 1998, I found that default judgment should be entered against the defendant Lawrence E. King in favor of the plaintiff, Paul A. Bonaccl. A trial on the issue of the damages due the plaintiff by that defendant was had on February 5, 1999. Two counts are alleged against the defendant Kincr in the complaint. Count V alleaes a conspiracy with public officers to deprive the plaintiff of his civil rights, designed to continue to subject the plaintiff to emotional abuse and to prevent him from informing authorities of criminal conduct. Count VII charges battery, false imprisonment, infliction of emotional distress, negligence and conspiracy to deprive the plaintiff of civil rights. Between December 1980 and 1988, the complaint alleges, the defendant King continually subjected the plaintiff to repeated sexual assaults, false imprisonments, infliction of extreme emotional distress, organized and directed satanic rituals, forced the plaintiff to "scavenge" for children to be a pan of the defendant King's sexual abuse and pornography ring, forced the plaintiff to engage in numerous sexual contacts with the defendant King and others and participate in deviate sexual games and masochistic orgies with other minor children. The defendant King's default has made those allegations true as to him. The issue now is the relief to be granted monetarily. The now uncontradicted evidence is that the plaintiff has suffered much. He has suffered bums, broken fingers, beatings of the head and face and other indignities by the wrongful actions of the defendant Kine. In addition to the misery of going through the experiences just related over a period of eight years, the plaintiff has suffered the lingering results to the present time. He is a victim of multiple personality disorder, involving as many as fourteen distinct personalities aside from his primary personality. He has given up a desired military career and received threats on his life. He suffers from sleeplessness, has bad dreams, has difficulty in holding a job, is fearful that others are following him, fears getting killed, has depressing flashbacks, and is verbally violent on occasion, all in connection with the multiple personality disorder and caused by the wrongful activities of the defendant King. Almost certainly the defendant King has little remaining financial resources, but a fair judgment to compensate the plaintiff is necessary. For the sixteen years since the abuse of the plaintiff began I conclude that a fair compensation for the damages he has suffered is $800,000. A punitive award also is justified, but the amount needs to be limited because of the small effect that such a judgment would have on the defendant King, given his financial condition and his presence now in prison. I deem a punitive award of $200,000 to be adequate. Dated February 19, 1999. BY THE COURT [Signature] Warren K. Urbom United States Senior District. Judge FILED US DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT FO NEBRASKA 99 F E B 22 AM 8 : 15 GARY D MCFARLAND CLERK IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF NEBRASKA PAUL A. BONACCI, 4:CV91-3037 Plaintiff, vs. JUDGMENT LAWRENCE E. KING, Defendant. IT IS ORDERED that the plaintiff shall have judgment against the defendant Lawrence E. King in the amount of $1,000,000 and taxable court costs in accordance with the Memorandum of Decision of today, together with interest at the rate of 4.584 percent per annum. Dated February 19, 1999. BY THE COURT [Signature] Warren K. Urbom United States Senior District Judge ===== IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF NEBRASKA PAUL A. BONACCI, (4:91CV3037) Plaintiff, vs. TRANSCRIPT LAWRENCE E. KING, Defendants. Hearing held before the Honorable Warren K. Urbom, Senior United States District Judge, on February 5, 1999 in Lincoln, Nebraska. APPEARANCES: Mr. John DeCamp Attorney at Law 414 South Ilth Street Lincoln, Nebraska for Plaintiff I -N-D-E-X WITNESS Direct Cross Redirect Recross Noreen Gosch 5 Russell Nelson 36 Paul Bonacci 101 Denise Bonacci 155 (At 9:01, the following proceedings were held.) THE COURT: This is the case of Paul A. Bonacci versus Lawrence E. King, 4:91CV3037. I see the plaintiff, Mr. Paul Bonacci, here with his counsel Mr. DeCamp. I do not see anyone representing Lawrence E. King. Is there anyone here representing Mr. King? I take it not. A default judgment has been entered against him. And the purpose of this proceeding is to determine the amount of damages that are to be awarded. Mr. DeCamp, you may proceed. Want to make an opening statement or not is entirely up to you. You may do that or call your witnesses as you choose. MR. DECAMP: May it please the Court, a very, very brief opening statement. What I want to establish here today, Your Honor, if at all possible, is the entire picture or scene in which Mr. Bonacci lived and prove to this Court's satisfaction the stories he tells in his petition are in fact true and the trauma that results from those stories is in fact very real. And even, Your Honor, we would hope that the Court, after hearing some of the evidence and information today for the first time ever, would maybe even on its own initiative take some appropriate action to correct some other wrongs or launch some other investigations that may be needed, Your Honor. THE COURT: That's not within my authority. So I can't do that. But I can award damages. And that's why we're here today. MR. DECAMP: Yes, Your Honor. So my first witness I would call would be Noreen Gosch. THE COURT: Come forward, please. THE CLERK: Maam, would you state your full name and spell it, please? THE WITNESS: Noreen Natalie Gosch. THE CLERK: Noreen is? THE WITNESS: Beg your pardon? THE CLERK: Would you spell Noreen? THE WITNESS: N-o-r-e-e-n. THE CLERK: Natalie? THE WITNESS: N-a-t-a-l-i-e. And Gosch, G-o-s-c-h. THE CLERK: Noreen Natalie Gosch. Noreen, N-o-r-e-e-n, Natalie Gosch, G-o-s-c-h. NOREEN N. GOSCH Called as a witness, being duly sworn, testified as follows: THE COURT: Sorry, tell me again, how do you spell your last name? THE WITNESS: G-o-s-c-h. THE COURT: G-o-s-c-h? THE WITNESS: Correct. THE COURT: Thank you. Mr. DeCamp. MR. DECAMP: Yes, Your Honor. DIRECT EXAMINATION BY MR. DECAMP: Q. Noreen, you arrived in Lincoln last night, is that correct? A. That's correct. Q. And where is your home? A. West Des Moines, Iowa. Q. And how long have you lived there? A. 28 years. Q. And do you have family there? A. Not any more. Q. Did you have family there? A. Yes, I did. Q. Who did you have as part of your family? A. I had my children and my husband. Q. How many children? A. Three children. The two older children have moved away and married. My youngest son was kidnapped and as a result of a lot of ensuing problems we divorced, my ex-husband and I, and I don't know where he's at. Q. Your son was a paperboy in Des Moines, is that right? A. That is correct. Q. And his name was what? A. John David Gosch. Q. Johnny Gosch he's typically referred to in the newspapers, is that correct? A. Johnny Gosch, yes. He had his paper route for 13 months running. And had been an employee of the Des Moines Register. Q. And how old was he when he was kidnapped? A. He was 12 years old. Q. And what year was he kidnapped? A. September 5th, 1982. Q. And has he been located? A. Yes and no. Q. Well come back to that. A. Okay. Q. Was the crime investigated? A. When my son was kidnapped that morning it was my utter total shock and amazement that the law enforcement did not respond the way I had envisioned that a kidnapping would be investigated. The investigating police officer to take the initial report did not come to our home till 45 minutes after I called in my son being missing. And in the length of time that it took him to arrive I had already telephoned the district manager for the newspaper, found out the names of all the witnesses that were there that morning. Johnny was kidnapped a short distance from our home and also within a block from the paper drop site. In that short amount of time I was able to contact all the witnesses, talk to them. I found out the description of the man who was talking to him on the comer. The description of the car. And when the police officer came in the only thing he brought in was the sheet of paper to fill out for the initial report. And I began telling him everything I had learned. And he looked at me and he said, well, has your son ever run away before? I said, he's never run away. He was taken. And I have these statements. I later found out that -- well, then the police officer left and we didn't I see anybody from the police department until 3:00 o'clock that same afternoon. My call went in at 7:30 a.m. I later found out that the police did in fact contact the witnesses that I had reported I talked to but they didn't I even so much as bring a clipboard into their homes to take notes. And all the witnesses thought it was very strange since there was a little boy missing as to why the police would not even take notes as to what the witnesses had seen. Q. Since the kidnapping occurred have you become extremely active in the issue of missing children? A. I have become extremely active in both the avenues of missing children and also trying to find my own son and solve his case. As to why he was taken, who was responsible. Q. Your son's picture was one of the first ones to appear, for example, on milk cartons, wasn't it? A. Yes, the milk carton effort was started in Des Moines, Iowa by Anderson Erickson Dairy. And my son and Eugene Martin were the first two missing children to be ever put on a milk carton. Q. Who is Eugene Martin? A. Eugene Martin is another paper carrier from West Des Moines or from Des Moines and he was kidnapped within a short time after Johnny, less than two years. Q. And has he been located? A. He has not been located to my knowledge. During the course of the investigation, the first year of it, the FBI paid a visit to our home and said they would not be entering the case. The police chief just would not order things to be done. They would not bring in aerial search, they wouldn't bring in a K-9 team, they didn't do the normal things that you would do to try and rule out a murder, for instance, if there was a missing person and a body somewhere. So I contacted the National Guard and they told me that, yes, they would use their helicopters but they would charge me $600 an hour in order to do it. And that became a news item, because we did have a lot of press coverage on this story. And a TV station from Omaha offered their helicopter for free. And that's when I began working very closely with the media to assist me. Q. And you over the years have worked closely with the media, is that correct? A. Yes, I have. They have been most helpful. I have a great many allies within the media. I treat them fairly and they know that when they speak to me I speak the truth. I have no reason to embellish anything and therefore I've become reliable and someone they know if they do a story on they're not going to have to do a retraction. Q. Back to the issue of participation in groups and with politicians that have written laws on this, have you been active in that area? A. Yes. Within the first year after Johnny was missing, I realized that partly the reason that no one looked for Johnny except his family was because there was no law on the books in Iowa or most any other state in the country specifying that the police would have to act sooner than 72 hours. Even though we had five witnesses that could describe the car, the man and various details of the kidnapping. So I wrote the first piece of legislation which became the Johnny Gosch bill. I got a senator and a representative to sponsor the bill in 24 both houses, same version, different numbers, in 25 hopes that one would pass. The first year it went down the funnel. I started the next year again and drummed the state capitol. I absolutely, they were sick of seeing me, I was up there. So, and then I went on the national speaking circuit. And I was all over the country speaking but whenever I was in Iowa I would pass a legislative sign up sheet and I would ask people that were of voting age to sign it. And then whenever we needed assistance or pressure to be brought to bear upon a representative or a senator we could activate a telephone tree and generate at least five hundred calls into the statehouse within an hour. And that became very successful because it was an election year. Q. Did you get some laws passed? A. Yes. The Johnny Gosch bill was passed in 1984, signed by the governor of Iowa, Governor Branstad, on July I st. While we were there at the signing there was a lot of press, and none of us knew that within a month and 10 days that that law would be put to the test. Because Eugene Martin was taken in August, a month following the signing of the Johnny Gosch bill into law. Then Missouri, Minnesota, Illinois, many other states contacted me. I testified before their legislatures and they have all adopted a version of the Johnny Gosch bill. And it stands in many other states as the Johnny Gosch law. Q. And have you, you stated you worked with the media in trying to promote the laws and also in helping to find Johnny, can you describe some of that? A. I did a lot of press conferences, a lot of TV shows, whenever there was information that could be safely released on Johnny I would release it so that we could keep the story alive. You can't keep saying Johnny Gosch is missing, Johnny Gosch is missing, or any other child, you have to provide the new <A HREF!ttp://www.ctrl.org/">www.ctrl.org</A> DECLARATION & DISCLAIMER ÝÝÝCTRL is a discussion & informational exchange list. Proselytizing propagandic screeds are unwelcomed. Substance—not soap-boxing—please! These are sordid matters and 'conspiracy theory'—with its many half-truths, mis- directions and outright frauds—is used politically by different groups with major and minor effects spread throughout the spectrum of time and thought. That being said, CTRLgives no endorsement to the validity of posts, and always suggests to readers; be wary of what you read. CTRL gives no credence to Holocaust denial and nazi's need not apply. Let us please be civil and as always, Caveat Lector. ÝÝÝÝÝÝÝÝÝÝÝÝÝÝÝÝÝÝÝÝÝÝÝÚrchives Available at: http://peach.ease.lsoft.com/archives/ctrl.html <A HREF!ttp://peach.ease.lsoft.com/archives/ctrl.html">Archives of [EMAIL PROTECTED]</A> http:[EMAIL PROTECTED]/ <A HREF!ttp:[EMAIL PROTECTED]/">ctrl</A> ÝÝÝÝÝÝÝÝÝÝÝÝÝÝÝÝÝÝÝÝÝÝÝÝo subscribe to Conspiracy Theory Research List[CTRL] send email: SUBSCRIBE CTRL [to:] [EMAIL PROTECTED] To UNsubscribe to Conspiracy Theory Research List[CTRL] send email: SIGNOFF CTRL [to:] [EMAIL PROTECTED] Om
