Nick Bryant book discussion thread: The Franklin Scandal

Moderators: DrVolin, 82_28, Elvis, Jeff

Postby Percival » Wed Oct 28, 2009 2:33 pm

bks wrote:
Percival wrote:

I am interested in real hard hitting investigative journalism that requires taking a look at both sides, ARGUING to the EXTREME in favor of each side then sitting back and taking a closer look at what you came up with. This pussyfoot shit around here lately where we all have to watch what we say for fear we might offend is just ridiculous and there is nothing rigorous at all about it. If you want to ARM YOURSELF to fight the critics who will soon be rearing their heads and showing their ugly faces and chanting 'carefully crafted hoax' then you need to look closer at that side of the argument and lay it all out there for them to see and show them how such a conclusion is flawed.


Do it here, Percival. That's what this thread is for. Seems to have Jeff's blessing. Just ignore the bullshit.

None of this has anything to do with Bryant's work and I wasnt suggesting his research was flawed I simply wanted to look more closely at how that GJ came to the conclusion that it was a carefully crafted hoax and I wanted to use our RI collaborative research efforts to lay that case out there for all to see.


Percival, Bryant spends a ton of ink on this. Bryant very clearly makes the case for investigative misconduct on the part of Samuel Van Pelt, and he says he believes the grand jurors were "most likely good citizens" overcome by the four-month process in which they heard truth, lies, irrelevancies and outright absurdities hurled at them. (p. 269).

Van Pelt, for instance, knew that the phantom phone call between Boner and Owen (the one in which Boner and Owen supposedly concocted the whole imaginary story) could not have taken place as Boner contended, because Van Pelt was in possession of a review of Caradori's company's phone records during the time in question. Van Pelt "never questioned Boner about his veracity concerning the call". (p. 271)

The call is obviously bullshit, as records show that no call was placed to or from the York facility where Owen was being held, to or from Caradori's office. So, too is the story of Boner's supposed hashing out of the story with Danny King later at the Residence Inn bar bullshit (The Residence Inn didn't have a bar). If there's no call, then Owen couldn't have been the source of the hoax as described by Boner.

Most damning, to me, was the grand jury's complete failure to interview employees from the charter plane companies King used. "The grand jury had access to scores and scores of Larry King's flight receipts, as accumulated by both the (Franklin) Committee and the feds, "and the overwhelming majority of them did not have accompanying FAA_mandated passenger manifests."

The GJ also had the names of pilots who flew the flights. Why no subpoenas? This is of course inexcusable, and demonstrates most clearly the fraud that was the GJ investigation.

There are plenty of other examples of the GJ lacking in thoroughness and the most basic due diligence in Bryant's book.


Cool, will contribute some of what I have found in this thread. I am trying to make contact with Ernie Chambers at the suggestion of another member here at RI and see what he has to say about all of this, he was known as a fierce advocate or those children at the time.
User avatar
Percival
 
Posts: 1342
Joined: Thu May 15, 2008 7:09 pm
Blog: View Blog (0)

Postby Percival » Wed Oct 28, 2009 2:47 pm

Free wrote:Whoops. Just read the other thread, the one that was locked.

I see where you're coming from Wombaticus, and it's a valid point.

But, in the context of this relatively small group, working with limited time and resources, I would see getting out there to get this book some press as the top priority right now.

And Percival, I'd like to make a friendly suggestion- if you haven't already, please get the book and read it. Then, I'll bet you'll then be able to think of some media contacts who would be willing to consider it.

I'm spending time this week and next, to contact media. The way The Franklin Scandal is written and documented gives it a high credibility quotient.

Then, (if we have the legal power), would be the time to prepare for filing a lawsuit. (BTW Thanks for suggesting it and offering to dedicate your time.)


I have the book and am almost finished with it, while it does answer a lot of questions that DeCamp didnt, I still find myself wanting/needing more information to build an actual legal case. What is presented makes for great reading and speculation but trying a case in a court of law requires an entirely different level of standard. I am not suggesting that I am some big shot lawyer with plans to start filing lawsuits on behalf of anyone involved but in my professions of law and press, this is how I think, there are simply too many loose ends and not enough bases covered in either of the Franklin books, but I absolutely agree Bryant has taken us a lot further down the yellow brick road than DeCamp was able/desired to.

Again, what is most important to me right now is to actually make a case that this was indeed a carefully crafted hoax and to lay out every single piece of evidence that points towards such and then dismantle that entire theory one issue at a time and see what/whose left standing.

As soon as I am able to talk with or meet Mr Ernie Chambers I should have a lot more answers than questions. I have put the word out that I wish to speak with him and I am awaiting contact. We will see how that goes. Chambers, IMO is a key figure in all of this that may have been overlooked. He claims to have seen actual smoking gun evidence with his own eyes, evidence that later disapeared.
User avatar
Percival
 
Posts: 1342
Joined: Thu May 15, 2008 7:09 pm
Blog: View Blog (0)

Postby chiggerbit » Wed Oct 28, 2009 4:57 pm

I suppose you could say that Percy is chewing away at the null hypothesis, only of the legal variety.
chiggerbit
 
Posts: 8594
Joined: Tue May 10, 2005 12:23 pm
Blog: View Blog (0)

Postby Percival » Wed Oct 28, 2009 5:58 pm

chiggerbit wrote:I suppose you could say that Percy is chewing away at the null hypothesis, only of the legal variety.


Well we all have our own way of doing things, my way has always been to play devils advocate and put myself in the shoes of the opposition and actually argue in favor of their case to the extreme, it is only after I have done that that I feel I am properly armed and ready to present my own case against them and to show how their's is flawed.

I do not feel that the GJ was part of this crime, it may be the case that one juror could have been involved and led the others in to his way of thinking during deliberations but I seriously have my doubts about that so I think there was some real evidence that does in fact point to a hoax and such evidence has somehow passed most of us by and I would personally like to know what it was that swayed them so that we can better understand their reasoning in coming to the conclusion they did.

One problem, as LBO pointed out, is that the case is very complex and difficult to pin down to any one thing or peice of evidence.


I am looking now for the actual grand jury report:

First there is this:

Image
It says the report was on page 14 so we need to find that.

Then there was this:


Not for commercial use. Solely to be used for educational purposes

July 8, 1992 Franklin Panel Faults Grand Jury's Conclusion; [Sunrise Edition] Robert Dorr. Omaha World - Herald. Omaha, Neb. pg. 1

Full Text (1184 words)
(Copyright 1992 Omaha World-Herald Company)
The online version is longer than the published version.

The Legislature's Franklin committee Tuesday criticized a grand jury's conclusion that child-sexual-abuse allegations against prominent men amounted to "a carefully crafted hoax."

But the legislative committee indicated in its final report that it was not certain who was telling the truth among four young adults who told the committee's investigator that as minors they had seen and experienced sexual abuse.

Two of the four recanted their sexual-abuse stories. The other two, Alisha Owen and Paul A. Bonacci, were indicted on perjury charges by the grand jury that said their allegations added up to a hoax.

The special legislative committee spent two years investigating various matters connected to the 1988 failure of Omaha's Franklin Community Federal Credit Union, including rumors that prominent Omaha men had sexually abused under-age boys and girls.

The committee's final report stated:

"It could be that a large portion of the (sexual abuse) stories are true with certain lies incorporated where necessary to make the testimony more dramatic. . . . We cannot be sure because the truth is now trapped in the minds of witnesses whose credibility under the circumstances cannot be ascertained with any certainty."

The 91-page report, signed by all five committee members and issued 18 months after the committee officially went out of existence, was less strident in tone than some past statements of State Sen. Loran Schmit of Bellwood, the committee's chairman.

Schmit contended throughout his committee's investigation that the sexual-abuse stories were believable.

During its two years, the committee spent $294,162.

The Douglas County Franklin grand jury, after interviewing 76 witnesses and meeting for 82 days, concluded in its final report on July 23, 1990:

"There is no doubt after reviewing all relevant evidence that the story of sexual abuse, drugs, prostitution and judicial bribery presented in the legislative videotapes is a carefully crafted hoax, scripted by a person or persons with considerable knowledge of the people and institutions of Omaha, including personal relationships and shortcomings."

The legislative committee responded in its final report:

"To assume that the 'hoax' was crafted assumed the existence of a craftsman. Who was it? To state that it was 'carefully crafted' assumes someone with intelligence and enough knowledge of accurate facts to make the 'hoax' credible. . . . We can find no clear evidence which conclusively establishes what was the truth and what was a hoax."

Miss Owen, now 23, was convicted last year by a Douglas County District Court jury of eight counts of lying to the grand jury in her stories of sexual abuse. She was sentenced to nine to 15 years in prison. She remains free on bail until her appeal of that sentence is decided.

Miss Owen has completed the sentence she had been serving for writing bad checks.

The Franklin grand jury also indicted Bonacci, 24, on perjury charges. The grand jury termed Bonacci "the most pathetic witness" to appear before the jurors.

The perjury charges against Bonacci were dismissed after Miss Owen was convicted. Bonacci remains in prison, where he is serving a sentence for sexually molesting minors.

Two others who told a legislative committee investigator that they were sexually abused as minors recanted those stories before they testified before the grand jury. The two - Troy Boner, 25, and Danny King, 22 - never were charged with any crime.

With two exceptions, the grand jury did not accuse any prominent men of sexual crimes.

One exception was Omaha businessmen Alan Baer, who was indicted on two charges of pandering. Baer later was fined $500 after pleading no contest last year to a reduced charge of aiding and abetting prostitution. The charges against Baer involved alleged sex acts between consenting adults and did not involve minors, a special prosecutor assigned to the Baer case said.

The other exception was Lawrence E. King Jr., former chief executive officer of the Franklin Community Federal Credit Union, which was closed by federal officials in 1988. The grand jury said King probably was guilty of pandering because he engaged in sex with men in their late teens or early 20s.

The grand jury did not charge him with that crime because, it noted, he faced 40 felony charges resulting from his alleged financial misconduct while Franklin's top officer. King later pleaded guilty to three charges of fraud and embezzlement and was sentenced to 15 years in prison.

The grand jury noted that Peter Citron, former World-Herald columnist and WOWT entertainment reporter, had been charged with molesting two young boys but said Citron had no connection with the Franklin case.

Citron is serving a prison term of three to eight years on two charges of sexual contact with boys.

The legislative committee's report criticized the grand jury for not charging King with sexual crimes and for stating that Citron's case wasn't connected to the Franklin case.

Because the grand jury failed to indict King, the allegations of illicit sexual acts against him never were fully investigated, the committee said, adding:

"Who might he have implicated? . . . We are left wondering whether there is much more to this story."

The committee said Citron was arrested because parents of two young boys molested by Citron became suspicious after he was named in a 1990 memo drafted by former State Sen. John DeCamp, a Lincoln lawyer-lobbyist.

The legislative report said: "If law enforcement had followed our lead, his (Citron's) arrest would have resulted directly from the Franklin investigation, although probably not on the specific charges on which he was convicted."

Miss Owen, in her videotaped accounts to the committee's investigator, named Citron among those she said had attended sex and drug parties at which she and other minors were abused.

In addition to Schmit, the committee's other members who signed the unanimous report were Sens. Jerome Warner of Waverly; Bernice Labedz and Dan Lynch, both of Omaha; and Dennis Baack of Kimball, the Legislature's speaker.

The report was dedicated to the memory of the late Gary Caradori, the legislative committee's investigator who was killed when the plane he piloted crashed in 1990.

Twelve days after Caradori died, the Franklin grand jury issued its report saying that Caradori led his witnesses and fed them information. "We believe that Caradori was duped into working with (Michael) Casey, who took advantage of Caradori's background information," the grand jury said.

Casey was a free-lance writer who was described by the grand jury as a con man.

The grand jury said Caradori "stood to gain professionally and personally" from the allegations of sexual abuse.

The legislative committee's report defended Caradori, saying that although his death left many unanswered questions about his investigation, "We do not believe for a minute that he was a 'dupe' for anyone.

"We also do not believe that he had any ulterior motives for developing the allegations made by Owen, Boner, King and Bonacci."

The legislative committee said that as a result of its work, the Legislature passed Legislative Bill 1246.

That measure, among other things, established a special unit in the Nebraska Attorney General's Office that assists county attorneys in prosecuting child abuse cases.

Credit: World-Herald Staff Writer




DOES ANYONE HAVE THE ACTUAL GJ REPORT HANDY?
User avatar
Percival
 
Posts: 1342
Joined: Thu May 15, 2008 7:09 pm
Blog: View Blog (0)

Postby American Dream » Wed Oct 28, 2009 6:51 pm

Percival wrote:
I am looking now for the actual grand jury report


My legal research skills aren't strong enough to really know about this, but you'd think there's a database out there where this is available.

PACER?

LEXIS-NEXIS?
User avatar
American Dream
 
Posts: 19637
Joined: Sat Sep 15, 2007 4:56 pm
Location: Planet Earth
Blog: View Blog (0)

Postby bks » Wed Oct 28, 2009 6:55 pm

With two exceptions, the grand jury did not accuse any prominent men of sexual crimes.

One exception was Omaha businessmen Alan Baer, who was indicted on two charges of pandering. Baer later was fined $500 after pleading no contest last year to a reduced charge of aiding and abetting prostitution. The charges against Baer involved alleged sex acts between consenting adults and did not involve minors, a special prosecutor assigned to the Baer case said.

The other exception was Lawrence E. King Jr., former chief executive officer of the Franklin Community Federal Credit Union, which was closed by federal officials in 1988. The grand jury said King probably was guilty of pandering because he engaged in sex with men in their late teens or early 20s.


So the GJ acknowledges that King was "probably" guilty of pandering, but that it was restricted to age-of-consent boys and men.

So the "hoax" element is the underage aspect of the story. The GJ acknowledges he's a pimp, just not a pimp of children.

But it's not just the victims who had knowledge that king was a pedophilic pimp by the time the GJ was meeting. Henry Vinson knew as well. According to Bryant, he told the feds not long after the Douglas County GJ had concluded its work.

The feds sealed the information from Vinson's trial, and apparently it remains sealed.

Vinson's testimony to Bryant supports the children's claims of a pedo ring. As do, in a general way, the claims of private detective Dennis Whalen to Bryant. Whalen said he attended a child auction in the United States while searched for an abducted child. There is other corroboration in the book as well.
bks
 
Posts: 1084
Joined: Thu Jul 19, 2007 2:44 am
Blog: View Blog (0)

Postby Cordelia » Wed Oct 28, 2009 7:00 pm

It's unfortunate that probably only if there was a clever, hard-to-put-down novel or a movie based on Franklin would it draw attention from the general population (of course, the masses go to the movies to get an inkling of the truth and to the media for fiction).

Percival wrote:Several people have mentioned the word 'evidence' and just to be clear and have a record of such here in this thread would anyone mind listing what they feel is actual evidence presented in the Bryant book, that proves the existence of the child-sex ring?


Actual hard evidence in the kinds of crimes that involve prominent people at the levels of Franklin's clientel is never going to be forthcoming in the way it might be for the rest of the population. I'm not sure if this belongs in this thread, but the other I was going to post in is locked, but I think the risk and the meticulous research that's done by dedicated and determined individuals like Bryant, and others, gets the real story told but it takes much more diligence because of the lack of 'proof', concrete authentication, etc..., therefore, can't a book like this be seen as more credible, rather than less, and therefore, promoted that way?

If Bryant had come too close to something harder, a 'smoking gun' that would ultimately expose some of the players, wouldn't he have not only been threatened, but actually ended up like Jim Keith or Danny Casolaro? I mean, if he'd followed up on one more outside lead, or made a suspicious phone call, and this alerted someone, who alerted someone else, would he have been allowed to finish the book? I think there should be amazement and awe that he got as far as he did and not sweat so much what he wasn't able to get in harder evidence (if he had, there probably wouldn't be a book).

I wonder if, these 'deficiencies' can somehow be turned into assets and if finding the 'flaws' in the book can be an opportunity to, well, spin them, which would be ok, because it's about exposing the truth, not about covering up lies.....
Last edited by Cordelia on Mon Nov 23, 2009 7:51 pm, edited 1 time in total.
"We may not choose the parameters of our destiny. But we give it its content." Dag Hammarskjold ~ 'Waymarks'
User avatar
Cordelia
 
Posts: 2899
Joined: Sun Oct 11, 2009 7:07 pm
Location: USA
Blog: View Blog (0)

Postby Percival » Wed Oct 28, 2009 7:05 pm

American Dream wrote:Percival wrote:
I am looking now for the actual grand jury report


My legal research skills aren't strong enough to really know about this, but you'd think there's a database out there where this is available.

PACER?

LEXIS-NEXIS?


Yea I can find it on my legal search software but I dont have that handy with me right now where I am. It also costs money and I dont like to spend it unless I have to, so I was just curious if anyone had a link to it handy because I am not seeing much on google but if nobody comes up with it I will do a pay search and post what I come up with here.
User avatar
Percival
 
Posts: 1342
Joined: Thu May 15, 2008 7:09 pm
Blog: View Blog (0)

Postby Percival » Wed Oct 28, 2009 7:09 pm

bks wrote:
With two exceptions, the grand jury did not accuse any prominent men of sexual crimes.

One exception was Omaha businessmen Alan Baer, who was indicted on two charges of pandering. Baer later was fined $500 after pleading no contest last year to a reduced charge of aiding and abetting prostitution. The charges against Baer involved alleged sex acts between consenting adults and did not involve minors, a special prosecutor assigned to the Baer case said.

The other exception was Lawrence E. King Jr., former chief executive officer of the Franklin Community Federal Credit Union, which was closed by federal officials in 1988. The grand jury said King probably was guilty of pandering because he engaged in sex with men in their late teens or early 20s.


So the GJ acknowledges that King was "probably" guilty of pandering, but that it was restricted to age-of-consent boys and men.

So the "hoax" element is the underage aspect of the story. The GJ acknowledges he's a pimp, just not a pimp of children.

But it's not just the victims who had knowledge that king was a pedophilic pimp by the time the GJ was meeting. Henry Vinson knew as well. According to Bryant, he told the feds not long after the Douglas County GJ had concluded its work.

The feds sealed the information from Vinson's trial, and apparently it remains sealed.

Vinson's testimony to Bryant supports the children's claims of a pedo ring. As do, in a general way, the claims of private detective Dennis Whalen to Bryant. Whalen said he attended a child auction in the United States while searched for an abducted child. There is other corroboration in the book as well.


Exactly as I posted earlier or in another thread perhaps what we did get from the GJ was an admission of proof that King was in fact a homosexual and that he liked younger men but no proof that his homosexual activity was anything other than consensual and with those of legal age. This is not to say that all homosexuals like young boys but it is not a reach to assume since he did like younger men, that with his money, power and influence that he may have went for young boys thinking he was connected enough to get away with it.

However, what this also tells us is that he had a reputation for being homosexual and liking younger men, information would could be use to craft a hoax against him by someone who wanted to take him down?
User avatar
Percival
 
Posts: 1342
Joined: Thu May 15, 2008 7:09 pm
Blog: View Blog (0)

Postby 8bitagent » Wed Oct 28, 2009 7:52 pm

The sheer unwillingness by the left to embrace Bryant's work as they had Blackwater and Shock Doctrine, has led Bryant to have to resort to doing interviews for crap like Jeff Rinse show(the Jew hating UFO disinfo circus)
http://www.youtube.com/results?search_q ... type=&aq=f

Now here's some recent interviews with Rusty Nelson

http://www.youtube.com/results?search_q ... type=&aq=f

I plan on reading this book soon, but Im curious:
Does it shed new expanded light on the role of Craig Spence?
(as well as the role of Donald Gregg, close pal of HW Bush)

During a lengthy interview at a Manhattan apartment a few months before his death, Spence alluded to more intricate involvements. "All this stuff you've uncovered (involving call boys, bribery and the White House tours), to be honest with you, is insignificant compared to other things I've done. But I'm not going to tell you those things, and somehow the world will carry on.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Craig_J._S ... oy_Scandal

So not only do you have the suspicious death of Caradori and Spence,
you have the mysterious death of former CIA director William Colby who had been helping Decamp on the Franklin scandal.

Not since researching JFK have I heard of so many people dropping like flies around a particular coverup.

Now if folks like Rusty Nelson have given recent interviews, Im sure theres new follows and such not covered in the new book?
"Do you know who I am? I am the arm, and I sound like this..."-man from another place, twin peaks fire walk with me
User avatar
8bitagent
 
Posts: 12049
Joined: Fri Aug 24, 2007 6:49 am
Blog: View Blog (0)

Postby lightningBugout » Wed Oct 28, 2009 7:57 pm

Does it shed new expanded light on the role of Craig Spence?


Very much so.
"What's robbing a bank compared with founding a bank?" Bertolt Brecht
User avatar
lightningBugout
 
Posts: 2515
Joined: Mon Jun 16, 2008 3:34 am
Blog: View Blog (0)

Postby bks » Wed Oct 28, 2009 8:03 pm

8bit wrote:

So not only do you have the suspicious death of Caradori and Spence,
you have the mysterious death of former CIA director William Colby who had been helping Decamp on the Franklin scandal.


Sadly, there are a few more than just these. They include Alisha Owen's brother, Aaron, Troy Boner's brother, Shawn and Troy Boner himself.
bks
 
Posts: 1084
Joined: Thu Jul 19, 2007 2:44 am
Blog: View Blog (0)

Postby lightningBugout » Wed Oct 28, 2009 8:27 pm

Lest we forget a great many drug-addicted, alcoholic and imprisoned men who claim to have been abused by King.
"What's robbing a bank compared with founding a bank?" Bertolt Brecht
User avatar
lightningBugout
 
Posts: 2515
Joined: Mon Jun 16, 2008 3:34 am
Blog: View Blog (0)

Postby Searcher08 » Fri Oct 30, 2009 12:46 pm

Cordelia wrote:
If Bryant had come too close to something harder, a 'smoking gun' that would ultimately expose some of the players, wouldn't he have not only been threatened, but actually ended up like Jim Keith or Danny Casolaro? I mean, if he'd followed up on one more outside lead, or made a suspicious phone call, and this alerted someone, who alerted someone else, would he have been allowed to finish the book? I think there should be amazement and awe that he got as far as he did and not sweat so much what he wasn't able to get in harder evidence (if he had, there probably wouldn't be a book).

I wonder if, these 'deficiencies' can somehow be turned into assets and if finding the 'flaws' in the book can be an opportunity to, well, spin them, which would be ok, because it's about exposing the truth, not about covering up lies.....



Important points, Cordelia

Bryant describes being threatened as soon as he started investigating. Yet seven years later he is still going strong. I think it would be useful to think about what areas that might leap out as NOT being investigated.

Did Bryant say anything about what areas he was warned away from?

On the one interview with Bryant I heard, he seemed pretty skeptical about justice ever happening.
User avatar
Searcher08
 
Posts: 5878
Joined: Thu Dec 20, 2007 10:21 am
Blog: View Blog (0)

Postby Jeff » Sat Oct 31, 2009 1:57 pm

Searcher08 wrote:Bryant describes being threatened as soon as he started investigating. Yet seven years later he is still going strong. I think it would be useful to think about what areas that might leap out as NOT being investigated.


Immediately I think of photos. That's why Caradori was murdered.

Bryant writes about being led around by Rusty Nelson, looking for his supposed cache of photos. I don't believe Nelson has any now. If he had, and if Bryant had come into possession of some, their lives would be as at risk as Caradori's. Without them, character assassination and media omerta is enough.
User avatar
Jeff
Site Admin
 
Posts: 11133
Joined: Fri Oct 20, 2000 8:01 pm
Blog: View Blog (0)

PreviousNext

Return to The Franklin Scandal

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest