CA - 13 victims, ages 2 to 29, shackled in home by parents, Perris, 15 Jan 2018 #7

[avondale14]

Adding on to your comment...I am surprised that any nurse or medical personnel would make a statement at all about these victims. I do not agree with passing this type of information on. Do we need to hear this? Feels like a gossip rag now. The whole world gets to hear that some of them might not know how to brush their teeth?! Privacy laws. My opinion only.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

I agree entirely.

 

[Spellbound]

****NOT JUSTIFICATION**** ****NOT JUSTIFICATION**** ****NOT JUSTIFICATION****

I don't know that anyone has said there were "legitimate" reasons, but finding angles the defense might use is what some do here. Take the restraints -
Schools, and they were homeschooled, were/are allowed to restrain children with autism and other severe behavioral problems (extent of my knowledge)...so might a defense attorney in a high profile case try to build reasonable doubt with this? JMO

****NOT JUSTIFICATION**** ****NOT JUSTIFICATION**** ****NOT JUSTIFICATION****

But... but.... but..... isn’t this a victim’s advocate forum? We aren’t the defense team. If we want to post what we believe the defense might use, then it has to be made clear that is what we are saying. Muddling the facts, whether circumstantial or forensicslly, is wrong.

restraining severe behaviroal problems does not include chains and starvation. Fact. They would be bombarded with professionals who would dispute that.


All JMO

 

[hposleuth]

I’m wondering if LT, in her twisted mind, thought that by keeping the kids locked up, filthy, stinking & *****-covered, as well as super-thin and tiny, was ‘protecting’ them from sexual abuse by the evil sexualized outside world (and maybe also their father). Starving girls will not develop breasts or have periods. That’s why I don’t think the 2 year old was a child of one of one of the older children. The starving girls could not have completed a pregnancy.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

 

[Tricia]

Please Remember Everyone,

You have an "Ignore" button. Go to your settings in the upper right-hand corner of this page. Click on settings and scroll and look to the left.
You will see "edit ignore list" and that is what you click on.

Otherwise, do not respond to posters who drive you nuts. It just causes problems and I end up timing out people I really don't want to time out but they leave me with no choice.

Thank you,
Tricia

 

[Ewood66]

I agree, Lucy; however, as you can see, there are people right on this very thread willing to justify and provide excuses for the horrible behavior of these parents, so maybe as a society we do need to hear the details to understand the horror.

Sometimes I feel I live in a bubble... and it is always distressing in this day and age, when many voices in our society feel that people with disabilities have less rights than the rest of us. The notion of restraints is archaic and inhumane. If the defense tries to say they had disabilities and that was the reason why they were shackled, unfortunately there will be jurors and many people following the case who will actually see this as appropriate.

At the moment, there is no evidence that these siblings had disabilities other than those brought about as a result of their abuse and neglect by their parents.

 

[MyBelle]

****NOT JUSTIFICATION**** ****NOT JUSTIFICATION**** ****NOT JUSTIFICATION****

I don't know that anyone has said there were "legitimate" reasons, but finding angles the defense might use is what some do here. Take the restraints -
Schools, and they were homeschooled, were/are allowed to restrain children with autism and other severe behavioral problems (extent of my knowledge)...so might a defense attorney in a high profile case try to build reasonable doubt with this? JMO

****NOT JUSTIFICATION**** ****NOT JUSTIFICATION**** ****NOT JUSTIFICATION****

Restraints are one thing but shackles -which require a key- aren't found in home schools, they are found in prisons.

 

[arkansasmimi]

If any of the 11yr old + kids don’t know what medication is, it’s probably more likely they didn’t have medical care. And thus no medical history.

For DA to say haven't seen in 4 years jmho means they have had medical care. Creditor in bankruptcy is an eye specialist. That was prior to CA though. Don't know their medical history, but someone had medical care, at sometime.

 

[vlpate]

Hi vmmking,

I've googled Bobby Spiegel, and the Corona Chamber of Commerce, and i'm a bit confused as to what their actual involvement would be on this case. I'm in the UK and would be grateful to understand a bit better. It just seems like such personal information doesn't it to release about them all. Thanks

Good grief

House of Horrors Kids Didn't Know How to Brush Their Teeth | PEOPLE.com
People.com › crime › turpin-siblings-hou...
“I don't think the kids even knew what a toothbrush was,” says Bobby Spiegel, president and CEO of the Corona Chamber of Commerce. “My understanding is the nurses had to teach the ..."

"I think" and "it is my understanding"

 

[aThousandYearsWide]

https://www.google.com/amp/s/heavy....ris-california-children-shackled-parents/amp/

Some interesting things regarding the family.


Sent from my LG-M153 using Tapatalk

 

[hposleuth]

It looks like one or more of the boys had eye problems.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

 

[rsd1200]

The parents gave away consciousness of GUILT when they rushed to unchain the kids upon the arrival of the police. The cops only found one kid chained because the parents didn't have enough time to unchain him. If they had a legitimate reason, even in their own perverse world, for chaining kids up, they probably would have said so. They provided the cops with no logical reason, when asked. JMO

I'm behind quite a lot today, but, by trying to get the kids unshackled, I agree, this shows they both knew that shackling their kids was very wrong, and they're very guilty. It's the same as if a cop pulls someone over and the occupant tries to discard a brick of cocaine by sailing it out the window. It's pretty much open and shut.

 

[Hatfield]

We haven't seen current photos. Again I am personally hoping not as bad. Bad enough but again there are possibilities for some. But don't know factually on anything.jmho

JMO
Sorry but I have to totally disagree.

We can wish all we want that it didnt happen and even put our head in the sand but it did happen.

There has already been many facts and links provided in the past 10 to 20 pages so I am not going to be redundant and share them again.

If one wants to refuse to believe what LE said in their charging documents and refuse to believe what LE says they saw upon entering the house about them being shackled and refuse what was communicated about the children being so emaciapated that they needed IV solutions and refuse to believe what neighbors and her own sister has said happened, and etc. etc. etc.

For me and IMO I have seen plenty already to believe that the charges against them are warranted. Once they are convicted by a jury then it will be obvious to all.

 

[vlpate]

Restraints are one thing but shackles -which require a key- aren't found in home schools, they are found in prisons.

True, but they didn't read that part. The fact that homeschool in California have no oversight could definitely bite them. But this is just a thought, we just don't know what their defense will be...but they will have one.

Edited to clean up mess

 

[arkansasmimi]

The older children (and even some of the younger) may remember some of the things we recently brought up here... they may know they never saw a doctor/dentist while living in this home, but remember seeing one at the last home or when they were a certain age, etc. I would imagine even with limited cognitive abilities they can give some factual details.

My point up thread, context if questions - how asked and to whom. Everything we know was within first day or so. By now the have all had completed medical work up and hopefully any medical information from parents. If given any medical information it can be compared by the professionals involved. But we won't be getting that info jmho. Privacy

 

[Lucyray]

Hospitals in most states do provide the media with condition reports on patients brought in by taxpayer-provided transport.

I did not know this. I thought the revelation about the lack of knowing how to use the toothbrushes came from the Chamber of Commerce in charge of receiving donated items for these children. I didn't see it in a media report. I thought a nurse mentioned it to the guy. My bad! I'll look for the media report.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

 

[Hatfield]

I'm behind quite a lot today, but, by trying to get the kids unshackled, I agree, this shows they both knew that shackling their kids was very wrong, and they're very guilty. It's the same as if a cop pulls someone over and the occupant tries to discard a brick of cocaine by sailing it out the window. It's pretty much open and shut.

Good analogy. The fact they unleashed two of them told LE they knew what they were doing was very wrong.

They will not be able to use in their defense that they did not know right from wrong. Its almost good in a way they tried to do that. Glad LE was fast to act in the house.

 

[avondale14]

Hospitals in most states do provide the media with condition reports on patients brought in by taxpayer-provided transport.

No detriment to 'Lucyray' at all here, (because that's who you'd responded to, and she was responding to a news report) but that's what perturbed me. Who is this Spiegel guy to be coming out with that to the press.

 

[peedoffinny]

According to the media, people have indicated how well behaved, quiet and polite they were. They visited Disneyland without being tied up. The siblings seemed very compliant in the videos and weren't tied up.

Im sure the children knew these special trips were short term and they knew exactly what they would face once they got home if they didnt behave as expected.

 

[kelynn]

Four years since any of them have seen a doctor...... does that mean the youngest was not born through the hospital system?

 

[Datchery]

Respectfully we don't know anything the Turpins will bring as a defense.

"The chains are bad enough, but we also have to take that in context of everything else we've heard. If this were simply a story of parents being arrested for keeping a child in chains, it might be possible (although still not likely) that we were dealing with uneducated, desperate, possibly borderline intellectually disabled people who simply could not think of a better way of dealing with a violent, troubled child who posed a danger to himself and others."

How do you or anyone if us know as you stated as fact that "not close to the story here" Respectfully do you know something we don't know?

And again discovery just started and we know nothing of anything on evidence. Defense filed a Motion on 18, I will find link. Only thing I am aware of.

But beyond a reasonable doubt will be what DA will prove on any charges that make to actual trial before one of possibly 2 juries. Unknown if the will be severed or not.

This is going to be my last post responding to you on this. As many of us have said, we are forming conclusions based on the totality of information that has so far come out. Obviously, the Turpins, like every other defendant, will have an opportunity to present a defense and go through a full trial, if they so choose. However, in light of numerous statements on the part of legal and medical authorities suggesting that these children suffered pervasive abuse in multiple ways (restraint, starvation, educational deprivation, neglect), I don't feel any need to grasp at straws as to why all or any of this might be justifiable.

I never claimed to know anything anyone else doesn't. I offered a hypothetical other type of case -- in which parents were arrested after chaining a child up -- and said, completely accurately, that that "isn't close to the story here," because it isn't. This is a case in which the parents are accused of multiple forms of pervasive abuse. So, even on the basis of the nature of the accusation, the kind of justification or mitigation that might apply in one case is not going to apply here, because granting the utmost benefit of the doubt on the logic of chaining up a child (and that phrase itself boggles my mind), that would not explain away the other charges, many of which have been backed up by numerous statements from professionals. So yes, I can confidently state as fact that the two scenarios I have described are different.

Again, I'm done.