THE FRANKLIN COVER UP,
CHILD ABUSE,SATANISM &
MURDER IN NEBRASKA
BY JOHN W. DECAMP
MURDER IN NEBRASKA
BY JOHN W. DECAMP
CHAPTER 9
THE DECAMP MEMO
On January 18, 1990, I released a document that soon became
infamous as "the DeCamp memo." For the first time, the names
of prominent alleged perpetrators were public.
A lot has been written about that memo, much of it full of
untruths and distortions. What follows is the true story of the
DeCamp memo and the events leading up to it.
In the spring of 1989, after the first child abuse stories
surfaced, I recommended to Senator Loran Schmit that he
go directly to the FBI in Omaha to discuss the very serious
allegations being made against Police Chief Robert Wadman
by various individuals. This was before anybody even knew
that Alisha Owen or other victim-witnesses existed and, of
course, before Alisha Owen's allegations against Robert Wadman
were made.
This legal advice of mine to Senator Schmit was in response
to his question as to how to handle things, when law enforcement
officials themselves were being accused of impropriety.
"Go to the highest authority you can, above the authority
who is being accused," I told him.
Senator Schmit insisted I go with him to this meeting, as
his personal attorney. I agreed to go, but on condition that he
first meet one-on-one with the regional head of the FBI, Nick
O'Hara, without me present.
He did meet with O'Hara for about one hour. Then I was
called into the room. It was only at that time, through discussion,
that I learned that the individual in question was former Omaha
Police Chief Robert Wadman.
In brutal language and with the most somber demeanor
possible, Mr. O'Hara made it clear that probably his closest friend in the world was Police Chief Robert Wadman, and
that anyone who would dare to accuse Robert Wadman of
impropriety had better realize that in accusing Wadman, they
were effectively taking on Nick O'Hara and the FBI.
I realized instantly, that my advice to Senator Schmit may
have been faulty. How could I have known in advance, that
the head of the FBI and the former chief were so intimate in
their business and personal relationships?
There was tension in the air. I made a point of saying
that I also was sure that all these accusations-whatever they
were-had to be nonsense. I pointed out that my experience
as a public official, a senator for sixteen years, made me appreciate
the fact that it is easy to accuse a public official and darned
difficult for one to defend himself, since the accusations are
immediately put on the front page of the paper and broadcast
as the lead story on the evening TV news.
But, as if to make a point that both I and Senator Schmit
had better understand how serious it was for anyone to come
to the FBI and raise questions about Robert Wadman, O'Hara
had us sit down and provide him information about ourselves, as
if we were the ones being accused and investigated, proceeding
exactly as one might expect the FBI to do with someone the
FBI was investigating.
"What's your date of birth? Where were you born? What
is your exact name? Do you have any aliases?" O'Hara quizzed
us.
When we left the FBI offices, I said to Senator Schmit,
"Wow, did I make a mistake. Anybody who dares to investigate
this is going to get themselves buried by the FBI, if they start
making any accusations against Wadman or anybody associated
with him."
I had no idea how prophetic those words were.
• • •
It was only after Caradori's first tapes had been turned over
to law enforcement agencies, that leaks of what was on them
began to reach the public and became the subject of widespread discussion. Articles began to appear in the Omaha World Herald.
aimed to discredit the witnesses and intimidate any
other potential child victim-witnesses from testifying or coming
forward with information.
As the stories proliferated, Gary Caradori expressed to Senator
Schmit his concern for the safety of the victim-witnesses
who had allowed themselves to be taped. Schmit sought my
legal advice again.
"These kids need protection or they are going to end up
dead, or become afraid to continue to tell the truth," the senator
said. "The committee has to do something to guarantee their
protection."
Gary Caradori was even more vehement on the need for
protection. "Unless they get into a protected environment,
where Alan Baer and Larry King and Robert Wadman are not
able to get to them and scare them, I can tell you the kids will
fold. They will do whatever those guys order them to do. They
will fold, or they will end up dead," Caradori hammered at
Senator Schmit. "You have to do something to protect them."
My legal advice to Senator Schmit and my direct warning
to Gary Caradori at that time, in December 1989 and January
1990, was the most painful information I have ever had to
provide someone.
"You cannot and should not do anything to use committee
funds or committee personnel to provide protection for these
kids," I told Schmit. "Otherwise, you and the committee may
be accused of impropriety and tampering with witnesses, and
who knows what else. Painful as it is for me to tell you this,
you have to find some other legal channel to provide protection
for the kids. Whether that channel is the courts or a judge or
whoever, it is something that either the lawyer for the kids
should be doing, or some institution of government vested with
the power and responsibility to do those things should be doing.
But you, Senator Schmit, should not personally get involved
in any way, shape or form in providing money or assistance
or protection for these kids, nor should the committee, in
my opinion."
Senator Schmit shared his concerns with other members of the legislature, who were hearing the rumors and who had their
own resources for finding out information. Key among them
was Senator Jerry Chizek of Omaha, chairman of the Legislature's
Judiciary Committee. He was very tight with Douglas
County Sheriff Dick Roth.
In early January 1990, as stories of what was involved in
the Franklin case spread through the streets of Omaha, Senator
Chizek took it upon himself to set up a very secret, private
meeting among Senator Schmit, Sheriff Roth, a representative
of the Douglas County District Court, Judge Corrigan, and
himself. I was asked by Senator Chizek and Senator Schmit
to attend the meeting. I was glad to come, for the purpose of
providing legal guidance to Senator Schmit, so that he did not
engage in trying to solve the problem of protection for the
witnesses in an illegal, if well-intentioned, manner.
The meeting took place in an auto body repair shop somewhere
in west Omaha, on what I am sure was the coldest day
of the year.
For most of the afternoon, discussion centered around the
essence of the rumors that were circulating about the contents
of the Caradori tapes. Attention was focused on the necessity
of protecting the victim-witnesses who had provided testimony.
Sheriff Roth had viewed the tapes. I presume others in the
room also had, including Senator Schmit. I personally had not
viewed the tapes and, believe it or not, have not viewed them
to this day.
From the conversation on that cold January day, there was
no doubt at all, that Sheriff Roth and others in the room believed
in the validity and accuracy of the allegations made on the
tapes.
As the talks progressed, Sheriff Roth used a phrase that had
special meaning to me. "I will tell you one thing," he said,
"Nick O'Hara of the FBI and Robert Wadman are closer than
nineteen is to twenty. Everybody in law enforcement knows
that. I know it especially well. Closer than nineteen is to twenty.
That makes it almost impossible to get anything done or to
arrange any witness protection through the feds. I will try to
help in any way possible, but I am not sure anything can or will be done. These people involved are just too powerful.
They carry enough weight in this community to do what they
want and get away with it."
Sheriff Roth did stand up for the victims of Franklin-related
child abuse, on several occasions. I know that he subsequently
came under intense pressure, including from the World-Herald,
to repudiate his belief that the allegations of the child victim witnesses
were true.
The net result of the secret meeting with Sheriff Roth and
Judge Corrigan of the Douglas County District Court was nothing.
The plan was for Judge Corrigan to explain the situation,
including the fact that fellow district court judges were the
subject of some of the accusations, to the other dozen district
court judges. Then a plan might be worked out, for witness
protection under the auspices of the court.
Unfortunately, that did not transpire. What Judge Corrigan
did or did not do, only he knows.
• • •
About the time of the secret meeting with Judge Corrigan
and Sheriff Roth, my office received a long-distance phone
call from a girl who identified herself as Loretta Smith. I returned her call.
"I'm one of the Franklin victim-witnesses," she explained.
"I'm the one they wrote a lot about in the Omaha World Herald.
A friend of mine told me that maybe you would help
me."
Having read the stories about Loretta, who was not identified
by name in the World-Herald, I knew basically the story she was
telling, as to her abuse and the individuals who had supposedly
abused her.
"I know who you are, Loretta, and if I can help you, I will," I said. "And yes, I have read about you and your story and,
surprising as it might sound to you, I do believe you."
We discussed ways I might help her.
A couple of weeks after that phone call, reporter Kathy
Rutledge of the Lincoln Journal telephoned me at night at home. She said she understood I had been in touch with Loretta
Smith, and she wanted to know all about the matter. It was
clear from the beginning of the conversation, by the tone of
her voice and her accusatory questions, that Kathy was intent
on doing a hatchet job on me.
I begged Kathy Rutledge not to distort facts. She repeatedly
tried to suggest that I had improperly contacted Loretta Smith.
Furthermore, she kept implying that I had told Loretta that I
had secret information on Franklin, which I would be trying
to use improperly.
I corrected Rutledge again and again. I pointed out to her
that if I had done the things she was saying or implying that
I did, such conduct would be a violation of legal codes of ethics
and would subject me to penalties, including even revocation of
my license to practice law. I urged that she not even write a
story about this, for the protection of the young lady involved.
If she insisted on writing a story, I said, she should at least
tell the truth and not distort facts.
A few days later, a lawyer working in my office, John Goc,
walked into the office carrying the Lincoln Journal and talking
loudly: "What are you trying to do, DeCamp, get yourself disbarred?
What are you going around talking to this reporter for?
When the Bar Association sees this, you can bet you'll be in
trouble. I hope you have a good explanation. You're going to
kill your lobbying business with this kind of story." That is approximately
what John Goc said to me on January 18, 1990.
I ran down to get a copy of the newspaper, knowing already
what Kathy Rutledge must have done. Determined to get herself
a headline story and lots of attention, she had to distort the
truth. Just as I feared, every negative and distorted impression
was conveyed by her story. Six days later, I would be notified
by the Bar Association that I was under investigation, as a
result of the Rutledge story.
Even before that happened, I was confronted by Omaha
World-Herald reporter Bob Dorr on the telephone, demanding
that I answer questions about Franklin, such as what I knew,
where I got my information, how I got the name of this Franklin
witness, what secret information I had, and why I was concealing things. His drift was the same as Kathy Rutledge's questions.
I determined that I could no longer keep silent. I would
answer the questions of Dorr in detail in writing, so that there
would be no misunderstanding or distortion possible. Or, if
there was distortion nonetheless, I would have a record of what
I had actually told him.
My answer to Bob Dorr' s questions was the DeCamp memo.
I also prepared a documented reply to the Nebraska Bar
Association inquiry, to prove that the conduct related by Kathy
Rutledge in her article had not occurred. I was able to submit
affidavits from two employees in my office, who swore that it
was Loretta Smith who contacted me, and not vice versa. I
also obtained an affidavit from a friend of Loretta, who knew
me and my wife from when we had helped her, on request
from her minister, several years earlier, and who was the person
who advised Loretta to call me. Within hours after presentation
to the Bar Association of this documentation, the bar investigation
was terminated. I was cleared of any impropriety or wrongdoing.
The Lincoln Journal ran a second story on the matter, after
the DeCamp memo was issued, in which Rutledge attempted
to correct the falsehoods and deceptions in the first story. In
any case, I filed a slander and defamation lawsuit against the
Journal for that first story, which lawsuit is still in the courts.
. . .
I charged in the memo, that in the Franklin case, "institutions
of government have failed and thus credibility of government
itself is at stake in this matter and in a very real sense, first
the legislative committee and then the Legislature, are the
court of last resort." (Emphasis in original.)
I had not seen the videotapes of the victim-witnesses and I
said so. but I wrote:
First. as a citizen who strongly pushed for the Franklin
investigation and in fact offered suggested language for the Senate Resolution which triggered the investigation, I find
what is occurring by both the Press and Institutions of Government
nothing short of criminal. The Press quietly and
carefully covers up, either thru ignorance or artifice, while
the various institutions of Government repeat the old Commonwealth/State
Security game of "let the statute of limitations
run" on those that should and could be immediately
prosecuted and investigate and study and "ask for more
information."
Why?
Because of the personalities involved.
The World Herald and Lincoln Journal want to know
where I get information on Franklin. Get serious. A reporter
has to be deaf, dumb, blind and corrupt not to know the
names of the personalities involved and the scope of the
allegations. Stop on any street corner in Omaha; go into any
coffee shop; have a drink in any bar in Omaha, or if you
are lazy, walk around the Capitol Rotunda in Lincoln and
simply listen to the discussions. Here is what you will learn:
1. The allegations are that the most powerful and rich
public personalities of the state are central figures in the investigation.
2. That these include former Omaha World Herald Editor
Harold Andersen; Larry King of the dead Franklin Credit
Union; Former Omaha Police Chief Robert Wadman; Media
Personality Peter Citron; Ak-Sar-Ben Financier and bluest
of the blue bloods, Alan Baer, for starters.
3. That the allegations are that these individuals were
some of the centerpieces in a co-ordinated program of Child
Abuse, Drug Abuse, and abuse of their various public positions
of trust and honor.
4. That prosecutors who should be prosecuting are afraid
to prosecute for one reason or another and that the public
itself is rapidly losing faith in its fundamental institutions
of government as a result of this perceived cover up, whether
real or imagined.
What do I personally believe. I damned well believe
the allegations.
Now, having said these things and reported these allegations,
am I afraid of being sued by these powerful personalities.
Absolutely not. Remember that rule you newspaper folk live and die by and crucify others by. If you have forgotten,
let me repeat it for you: truth is a defense. And, since these
are all public figures, we also know that absent any malice,
and I have none, truth is definitely a defense.
No, I do not fear a lawsuit. I fear, just like any alleged
child victims in this bizarre tragedy, that the rich and the
powerful will use their positions of power and control of
institutions of government to shut up those who would speak
out and bring things to a head.
• • •
The DeCamp memo lit a firestorm of controversy in Omaha
and statewide. On radio, TV, and in the press, it was dealt with
daily for several weeks.
The furor touched off by the circulation of the memo is
conveyed in a March 17, 1990 Kansas City Star article, headlined
"Former legislator's angry memo turns sober Nebraska
on its ear":
Two months ago, DeCamp sat behind his word processing machine and pounded out the infamous "DeCamp Memo."
The piece of invective became the subject of discussion
from Omaha's silk-stocking salons to the cowboy bars in
the Sand Hills.
He named five prominent Omaha men as "central figures"
in a legislative committee's yearlong review of allegations
of sexual abuse linked to the 1988 collapse of the Franklin
Community Federal Credit Union....
DeCamp's memo found its way to dozens of copy machines
and quickly littered the state, spawning a swirl of
gossip. In an attempt to put the rumors to rest and find the
truth, the U.S. attorney called a federal grand jury last
month.
And next week a Douglas County grand jury in Omaha
will begin hearing the allegations, including one that King
flew teenagers to Kansas City in 1985 to perform sex with
men in a rented room at the Westin Crown Center Hotel.
Hardly modest, DeCamp takes credit for the convening
of the grand juries. "If it had not been for that memo,there would not even be a grand jury investigation today,"
DeCamp contends ....
DeCamp had the audacity to name, among others, Harold
Andersen, former publisher of the Omaha World-Herald.
DeCamp left the implication that Andersen, an icon of journalism
who lunches with President Bush, had a fetish for
children. Said one politician, "It was like insulting God."
Rumors started reaching me, that I was going to be sued by
various people.
Finally, a close friend of mine, who is a prominent reporter
in Nebraska and whom I agreed not to name in this book, came
to me privately to say that an agreement had been reached
among the various individuals I had named in the memo, and
others, for Peter Citron to be the one to sue me. The purpose
would be to destroy me in full view of the public, and to
repudiate the DeCamp memo.
Peter Citron
Truth put a crimp in that plan. Not long after the message
was delivered to me, Peter Citron was charged with sex crimes
involving male minors in the Omaha area. It seems that some
parents, who knew their children were hanging around Peter
Citron, were shocked to see him named in the DeCamp memo.
They responded by asking their children, whether or not there
was any truth to the allegations, with respect to Citron. One
after another, the boys began to pour out the truth to their
parents.
The demands by parents for immediate action left the police
and prosecutors no choice. They had to file charges against
Peter Citron, although I rather suspect they did not want to.
Citron ultimately pleaded guilty. Today he is in prison,
sentenced as a mentally disordered sex offender.
• • •
Needless to say, the World-Herald devoted many column inches
to condemning the DeCamp memo as irresponsible.
I cannot neglect to comment on the World-Herald's overall
role in the Franklin scandal.
Nebraska has only one state-wide news source. It is the Omaha World-Herald. Our small population, vast expanses,
and the cost of maintaining a daily newspaper in this day and
age, all guarantee that the World-Herald is the news source
for this state. With that awesome power, one would think would
come a corresponding measure of responsibility, to make sure
Nebraskans get all sides of an issue. That they really get the
news.
But the World-Herald's long-standing pattern of behavior
is just the opposite. If it has an editorial attitude on a story,
its news coverage and every other aspect of the newspaper are
mustered to accentuate the preferred side of the issue and
suppress opposing views.
In the case of Franklin, the paper went to new lengths. The
integrity and credibility of the newspaper went on the chopping
block, for the sake of suppressing the truth about Franklin and,
to a high degree, the Commonwealth and State Security banking
stories-Nebraska's three biggest scandals of the last fifty
years.
Harold Andersen
Why all this effort? Because, tragically, the people who
control the World-Herald appear to have a strong vested interest
in suppressing the truth. Whether it is Peter Citron, past publisher
Harold Andersen, or underlings who have their positions
only because of Andersen, their linkage to Franklin dictates
that they use the best tool available, the World-Herald, to tell
the public what they want them to believe.
Because of its virtual monopoly as a news source, something
repeated often enough by the World-Herald may attain the
status of truth in the minds of those who read it. In the case
of Franklin, the paper has repeated a simple theme, shaped by
its top personnel-that the Franklin sex scandal, pedophilia
and drug abuse stories were trumped up.
I can present certain facts, never publicly revealed before
now, that exemplify the program of deception carried on by
the World-Herald throughout the Franklin scandal, continuing
to the present.
In coverage of the DeCamp memo, and in other Franklin
coverage, the impression given by the World-Herald was that
the legislative committee to investigate Franklin, headed by Senator Schmit, was functioning in an irresponsible manner,
allowing leaks to the press and to others. In editorials and
on the news pages, the World-Herald repeatedly condemned
Senator Schmit for supposedly leaking information. Then they
attacked me, for supposedly obtaining information from Senator
Schmit and leaking it.
The truth was the opposite. I was providing information to
the committee, as committee records will bear out.
Probably the best example of this would be the detailed
breakdowns of Franklin Credit Union financial transactions,
which the committee received from me, months in advance of
their own investigation.
How did I get such data? Believe it or not, I got them from
the chief counsel of the National Credit Union Administration
(NCUA), Robert Fenner.
In an unsolicited phone call from him, Fenner gave me
details about Franklin's secret accounts. In retrospect, I believe
he wanted-through me-to throw cold water on the questions
that were heating up in Omaha, about the role of Franklin
monies in the Iran-Contra money-laundering schemes. At the
time, I asked Fenner if he wanted me to share his information
with Senator Schmit, which he did.
I immediately drafted a detailed memo of my conversation
with Fenner. I provided the information to Senator Schmit,
for the legislative committee. I gave Fenner's phone number
to Schmit.
Thus, from the outset, I was sending information to the
Senate Franklin committee, and not the other way around.
Lincoln Journal article of January 18.
1990. which appeared despite John DeCamp's
urging journalist Kathleen Rutledge
to "tell the truth and not distort
facts. "
Six days later. this letter from the Nebraska State Bar Association notified
DeCamp he was under investigation for improperly contacting a victimwitness
Affidavits from Det.amp's secretaries and a friend of the victim-witness
proved that the Journal was distorting facts.
After Rutledge's article appeared. Omaha World-Herald reporter Boh Dorr
telephoned DeCamp, demanding to know where DeCamp got his information.
how he got the name of the Franklin witness. and what secret information
he had. So that there would he no groundsfor misunderstanding or distortion.
DeCamp decided to answer in writing. This was the origin of the DeCamp
Memo. shown here.
CHAPTER 10
PAUL BONACCI
In May 1990, Caradori discovered a fourth victim-witness,
Paul Bonacci, whose testimony corroborated and amplified the
stories told on the earlier videotapes. Caradori's daily notes of
May 10 record his first contact with Bonacci, at the Douglas
County jail.
After discovering Dan Newton* wasn't at this facility, this
writer then contacted Inmate Paul A. Bonacci. ... Paul
Bonacci's name had been given to me by a Mary Barrett,
and I had his name for quite some time.
Upon having Mr. Bonacci meet me in an interviewing
room, Bonacci related to this writer that he knew Troy Boner,
Danny King, and Alicia [sic] Owen. He further advised that
he had been a victim of Alan Baer, Peter Citron, and Larry
King, and had some knowledge of Bob Wadman, Harold
Anderson, and a judge who he later on referred to as Carlson.
During the next few hours, he related some of his knowledge
reference Peter Citron, Alan Baer, Larry King, and also
Bob Wadman.
The subject stated that he had been on at least 1-200
trips and had been involved in extensive homosexual activity
as a child and as a young adult, with his homosexual activity
starting when he was approximately 8-10 years old. The
subject then stated that between the years of 1982 and 1986
he had probably been on at least 200-300 trips. The subject
stated that he made at least 15-20 trips to various parts of
California, a couple of trips to Washington, D.C., and also
trips to Des Moines, Minneapolis, Kansas City, Austin,
Houston, Dallas, St. Louis, Miami, Pasadena, Tampa, Lincoln,
and Grand Island. Some of those trips he thought involved politicians from Washington, D.C., however, he
didn't know anyone by name because of his young age.
The subject stated that he was taken to the Omaha Police
Department sometime in March and was talked to by Omaha
Police Detective Mike Hoch, during which time Detective
Hoch was very hard on Bonacci, and after finishing up with
the police interview, he told Bonacci, that, reference Larry
King, he was afraid he might prosecute him (Bonacci) as
there would be no attempt to give him formal immunity.
When questioned about Alan Baer, he stated that he first
met him in the "Milk Run," an area near and surrounding
the Correctional Center. He stated that he was approximately
12 years old and that this occurred possibly in 1979. He
stated that Alan Baer would pay him $20 for oral sex. He
stated that the last time he had sex with Alan Baer was,
he believed, around November 15, 1989, in Alan Baer's
apartment in the Twin Towers....
Other information received from Paul indicated that he
had tried to get away from these people on many occasions,
and in his attempt to escape them he did attempt suicide.
He stated that he was very afraid of Larry King's "people."
In fact, there was a black individual whom he called "Larry
Little King," who would go around and make threats and
attempt to scare him and other individuals. Paul Bonacci
indicated that he was really very scared of being threatened.
In reference to Bob Wadman, subject stated that he believed
he met Wadman sometime in late 1985 or early 1986.
He stated that he had seen Bob Wadman at [at] least two
parties that were located near the town of Elkhorn, Nebraska....
During the course of the conversation, subject stated that
Alisha Owen was present at [at] least one of these parties
that Wadman had attended also. The subject believed the
girl (Alisha) and Wadman might have been together....
Other information gained during the interview: Bonacci
stated he knew when Alisha Owen got pregnant because a
young individual by the name of Chris told him that it was
probably Bob Wadman who got Alisha pregnant. Further,
he stated that there was another individual who he had spent time with in the Twin Towers by the name of Bob Morino,
Apt. #4H, Twin Towers, Omaha, Nebraska. Also, there was
another young boy sexually abused by Alan Baer by the
name Peter Fells*. He stated that this individual might have
moved to Tennessee, however, he was not sure.
Paul Bonacci went on to state that he had gone on many
"scavenger hunts" for Alan Baer. He defined "scavenger
hunts" as an activity in which he would go out and recruit
young boys for Alan Baer. ...
He stated that Larry King would fly him all over the
country. On at least one trip to California, Alisha Owen was
present on the flight. ...
He stated that on at least one trip he had seen Troy,
Danny and Alisha in California. That was sometime in 1985
or '86....
He also stated he made two trips to Washington, D.C.
with Larry King-just the two of them alone. He stated that
while in Washington. D.C.. he had sex with other people.
He thought they were part of the Republican Party because
Larry King was trying to hard to "get in with the higher
ups" in the Republican party. He stated that he heard the
name of one of the individuals with whom he had sex as
Frank. He thought he might be a senator or governor or
some state official.
• • •
On May 14, 1990 Caradori took a video statement from
Bonacci. He wrote in that day's notes:
Further, when questioned, Mr. Bonacci stated that his last
contact with Alisha Owen, he thought, was in 1986, and
with Troy Boner and Danny King in 1987. He stated that
he had no physical, verbal, or written communication with
any of those three since that time.
One of the experiences with Larry King, which Bonacci
described to Caradori on tape, he later detailed again in his
written account of abuse, prepared for his lawyer, this writer.
Bonacci has often said, that he wants the full story of his abuse
to be public. "Somebody has to tell the story," he wrote in the
introduction to this document, "And it might as well be me."
Gruesome as it is, Bonacci's report to me harks back to the
early cries for help, from Loretta Smith:
I went in January of '84 on every trip. I was paid by men
King knew for sex. In the summer of '84 sometime I went
to Dallas Texas and had sex with several men King knew
in a hotel.
I flew on Y.N.R Airlines and Kam Airlines normally for
King. I never had much personally to do with King, only
went where he told me to go.
In or on July 26th I went to Sacramento, Ca. King flew
me out on a private plane from Eppley Airfield [in Omaha]
to Denver where we picked up Nicholas, a boy who was
about 12 or 13. Then we flew to Las Vegas to a desert
strip and drove in to Las Vegas and to some ranch and got
something. Then flew on to Sacramento.
We were picked up by a white limo and taken to a hotel.
I don't remember the name of it. We meaning Nicholas and
I were driven to a area that had big trees, it took about an
hour to get there. There was a cage with a boy in it who
was not wearing anything. Nicholas and I were given these
tarzan things to put around us and stuff.
They told me to f--- the boy and stuff. At first I said no
and they held a gun to my balls and said do it or else lose
them or something like that. I began doing it to the boy and
stuff. And Nicholas had anal sex and stuff with him. We
were told to f--- him and stuff and beat on him. I didn't try
to hurt him. We were told to put our d---s in his mouth and
stuff and sit on the boys penis and stuff and they filmed it.
We did this stuff to the boy for about 30 minutes or an hour
when a man came in and kicked us and stuff in the balls
and picked us up and threw us. He grabbed the boy and
started f---ing him and stuff. The man was about 10 inches
long and the boy screamed and stuff and the man was forcing
his d--- into the boy all the way. The boy was bleeding from
his rectum and the men tossed him and me and stuff and
put the boy right next to me and grabbed a gun and blew
the boys head off
The boys blood was all over me and I started yelling and
crying. The men grabbed Nicholas and I and forced us to
lie down. They put the boy on top of Nicholas who was
crying and they were putting Nicholas hands on the boys
ass. They put the boy on top of me and did the same thing.
They then forced me to f--- the dead boy up his ass and
also Nicholas they put a gun to our heads to make us do it.
His blood was all over us. They made us kiss the boys lips
and to eat him out. Then they made me do something I don't
want to even write so I won't.
After that the men grabbed Nicholas and drug him off
screaming they put me up against a tree and put a gun to
my head but fired into the air. I heard another shot from
somewhere. I then saw the man who killed the boy drag
him like a toy. Everything including when the men put the
boy in a trunk was filmed. They took me with them and we
went up in a plane. I saw the bag the boy was in. We went
over a very thick brush area with a clearing in it. Over the
clearing they dropped the boy. One said the men with the
hoods would take care of the body for them.
I didn't see Nicholas until that night at the hotel. He and
I hugged and held each other for a long while. About two
hours later the men or Larry King came in and told us to
go take a shower since we had only been hosed off at some
guys house. We took a shower together and then were told
to put on the tarzan things. After we were cleaned up and
dressed in these things we were told to put on shorts, socks
and a shirt and shoes and driven to a house where the men
were at with some others. They had the film and they played
it. As the men watched they passed Nicholas and I around
as if we were toys and sexually abused us.
They made Nicholas and I screw each other and one of
the men put the dead boy's penis in mine and Nicholas'
mouth. I didn't want to write this because the man forced
me to bite the boys' penis and balls off. It was gross and I
saw the film where it happened and started freaking out
remembering what they made us do afterwards to the boy.
They showed us doing everything to the boy. I was there
for about 5 days attending parties but only recall cutting my
wrist which is why I stayed two days in a hospital under a
name I can't recall. Some guy paid for me.
In other testimony, Bonacci said that Larry King was smiling
and laughing the whole time the film was being shown, and
that "the men with the hoods" were a Satanic group which
planned to use the dead boy in some sort of ceremony. He also
named the director of the snuff film, whom they had picked
up in Las Vegas, as "Hunter Thompson."
to be continued....next...
COVER-UP PHASE II
THE DOUGLAS
COUNTY GRAND
JURY
No comments:
Post a Comment