NC - 12-year-old dies at Trails Carolina wilderness therapy camp, Lake Toxaway, February 2024


<modsnip: quoted post was removed>
There's no evidence those kinds of places are beneficial to anyone, and this particular place had a history of infractions.

IMO turning nature into an instrument of torture is not for any child. There are plenty of camps for every which variety of kid that are not so extreme. Challenging, but not torture.
I'm curious how many parents actually vet these boot-camps/wilderness therapy camps before sending their kid there?

Desperate parents can be in a weak and vulnerable state and accept what their told by camp administrators at face value without using any discernment.

I
 
Two boy grandson, they would run around in underwear or naked, if allowed. They never sleep in the nice pj's they have, nope boxers or commando.

I wonder if he got hot, during or after the panic attack and removed?
Maybe, he sleeps commando.

It is odd, counselors can offer no explanation. I would think if there was any type of nefarious plot to cover up a crime, they would have dressed the child. They had to realize this would be a red flag and create many questions.

Moo...
IMO it would be difficult to dress the child after death, since he was in rigor mortis, and his knees were bent.

But the staff may not have realized that a child not having pants on might be a red flag.
 
Two boy grandson, they would run around in underwear or naked, if allowed. They never sleep in the nice pj's they have, nope boxers or commando.

I wonder if he got hot, during or after the panic attack and removed?
Maybe, he sleeps commando.

It is odd, counselors can offer no explanation. I would think if there was any type of nefarious plot to cover up a crime, they would have dressed the child. They had to realize this would be a red flag and create many questions.

Moo...
he was alleged to be in the bunkhouse. At least two staffers were reported to have been monitoring him during his panic attack. Was he nude from the waist down at that point? Were there other kids in the bunkhouse with him or was it just him, alone with two adults periodically looking in on him?

The clothing thing has me stumped. He was 12, at that age where boys begin to get a bit more private about their privates IME. He was in a strange place, having been spirited away from his home unexpectedly and plunked down into the wilderness with strangers. I can't see him feeling comfortable enough to be airing out his nether regions in that circumstance. JMO there will be a more nefarious reason he was nude on his bottom half.
 
I’m thinking hog-tied. I have this in the forefront of my mind because of a few details in the Franke case, where the child was hog-tied.
I’m thinking they tied his wrists to his ankles, and thus the bent knees.
Wouldn't there be evidence on the body of being tied up? No evidence found, stated not a natural cause.

Why would this not be included in the search warrant? Warrant stated unnatural cause, no mention of restraint mark, no choking marks

Why would the Behavior Health Board who send staff immediately, not close the facility, if they "hog-tied" the child? I grew up farming, very familiar with hog-tied, it leaves marks, especially if fighting against the restraint.

BHB 100% have the authority, they don't need a judge or court order. BHB staff were onsite, very quickly per the media release. They still have staff on site and DSS is onsite, per media, even on the weekend.

Would all these agencies be protecting the Camp? Why would state agencies leave mental/behavioral clients in a dangerous facility, that ties up children, in a high profile death case?

I believe this could be an unfortunate accident or possible undiagnosed health conditions.

I believe this is a good camp, part of four, able to share policies, ideas, and better placement to meet the child's needs. They have many highly credential staff, and don't think they would be in business, if they were abusing kids. Must less, the counselors risk loss of license and jail.

Yes, there was ONE complaint (6/21) same time frame, media produced a story) for lack of phone calls to parents and according to state reports, unfounded. Yes, paperwork medication errors, common in all ALS, BH, LTC and group homes, no misuse or incorrect drugs given. All corrected with action plans, and state follow up to ensure compliance.

Moo...

Link to BH
 
Last edited:
Two boy grandson, they would run around in underwear or naked, if allowed. They never sleep in the nice pj's they have, nope boxers or commando.

I wonder if he got hot, during or after the panic attack and removed?
Maybe, he sleeps commando.


It is odd, counselors can offer no explanation. I would think if there was any type of nefarious plot to cover up a crime, they would have dressed the child. They had to realize this would be a red flag and create many questions.

Moo...
BBM

We don't even know if the boy had a panic attack.
There's NO reason to accept anything the camp claims as being factual.
 
Last edited:
I’m thinking hog-tied. I have this in the forefront of my mind because of a few details in the Franke case, where the child was hog-tied.
I’m thinking they tied his wrists to his ankles, and thus the bent knees.
Interesting. A quick search for hog tie images shows something different though, see article below. However, maybe there are other ways to do it?

IMG_2431.png

 
he was alleged to be in the bunkhouse. At least two staffers were reported to have been monitoring him during his panic attack. Was he nude from the waist down at that point? Were there other kids in the bunkhouse with him or was it just him, alone with two adults periodically looking in on him?

The clothing thing has me stumped. He was 12, at that age where boys begin to get a bit more private about their privates IME. He was in a strange place, having been spirited away from his home unexpectedly and plunked down into the wilderness with strangers. I can't see him feeling comfortable enough to be airing out his nether regions in that circumstance. JMO there will be a more nefarious reason he was nude on his bottom half.
He was in an enclosed bivy, kinda sleeping bag tent.
Moo, maybe this gives the new camper privacy and used on the first night, per the media. He was able to exit, but an alarm would sound, no physical restraint, was inside the cabin, with I think, four others and two counselors.

I would think the Behavior Health Licensing staff, LE, and DSS would be aware of any nefarious reason by now. Even if they suspect, the law requires the removal of all clients/campers, immediately.
 
Wouldn't there be evidence on the body of being tied up? No evidence found, stated not a natural cause.

Why would this not be included in the search warrant? Warrant stated unnatural cause, no mention of restraint mark, no choking marks

Why would the Behavior Health Board who send staff immediately, not close the facility, if they "hog-tied" the child? I grew up farming, very familiar with hog-tied, it leaves marks, especially if fighting against the restraint.

BHB 100% have the authority, they don't need a judge or court order. BHB staff were onsite, very quickly per the media release. They still have staff on site and DSS is onsite, per media, even on the weekend.

Would all these agencies be protecting the Camp? Why would state agencies leave mental/behavioral clients in a dangerous facility, that ties up children, in a high profile death case?

I believe this could be an unfortunate accident or possible undiagnosed health conditions.

I believe this is a good camp, part of four, able to share policies, ideas, and better placement to meet the child's needs. They have many highly credential staff, and don't think they would be in business, if they were abusing kids. Must less, the counselors risk loss of license and jail.

Yes, there was ONE complaint (6/21) same time frame, media produced a story) for lack of phone calls to parents and according to state reports, unfounded. Yes, paperwork medication errors, common in all ALS, BH, LTC and group homes, no misuse or incorrect drugs given. All corrected with action plans, and state follow up to ensure compliance.

Moo...

Link to BH
The camp had carte-blanche to so as they liked.

Did the State Inspections have to be scheduled so the camp didn't have to be concerned by a surprise inspection?



'State regulations require an inspection every 12 to 15 months. But inspection reports show that annual inspections sometimes took place at longer intervals.

The last three inspections took place in 2016, 2018 and 2019.



A spokeswoman said inspections were suspended in 2020 during the pandemic, even though Trails Carolina continued to operate.'

 
he was alleged to be in the bunkhouse. At least two staffers were reported to have been monitoring him during his panic attack. Was he nude from the waist down at that point? Were there other kids in the bunkhouse with him or was it just him, alone with two adults periodically looking in on him?

The clothing thing has me stumped. He was 12, at that age where boys begin to get a bit more private about their privates IME. He was in a strange place, having been spirited away from his home unexpectedly and plunked down into the wilderness with strangers. I can't see him feeling comfortable enough to be airing out his nether regions in that circumstance. JMO there will be a more nefarious reason he was nude on his bottom half.
From ^^^^ there were 3 staff and 4 juveniles in the cabin IIRC.

I can't see sleeping commando either, the first night, in a strange place, when you've been ripped from your home, and you're with strange people who are likely aggressive.
 
We don't even know if the boy had a panic attack.
There's NO reason to accept anything the camp claims as being factual.
There is no reason not to believe the camp. There are many state agencies on site, to include LE, the media says the FBI, as well.

I don't believe all these agencies would leave mental/behavioral health clients in a dangerous situation. It's illegal, per the BH regulations and the NC Code, then add the federal code for abuse of mentally ill. Nope, don't see a cover up and risk going to prison.

They only have about 35 clients per the BH last inspection report, not a problem to move 35 kids.

moo
 
He was in an enclosed bivy, kinda sleeping bag tent.
Moo, maybe this gives the new camper privacy and used on the first night, per the media. He was able to exit, but an alarm would sound, no physical restraint, was inside the cabin, with I think, four others and two counselors.

I would think the Behavior Health Licensing staff, LE, and DSS would be aware of any nefarious reason by now. Even if they suspect, the law requires the removal of all clients/campers, immediately.
All the campers were indeed removed from the location.

It's unclear if "bivy" was what the camp was euphemistically calling their contraption or if it was actually a bivy. From LE description, it didn't sound like any technical bivy I've seen, with a pole on one side, and the other side collapsed.
 

The lawsuit, filed on Saturday, alleges that a female camper, who was 12 years old, was sexually assaulted at Trails Carolina in 2016.

A second girl was allegedly assaulted by the same camper and was removed from the girl’s group for “manipulative behavior” after reporting it.

The victim also alleges the campers developed pinworms from unclean water and that the girl got staph infections and a UTI from the conditions, lost a significant amount of weight due to a lack of food provided to campers and was deprived of a shower for over a week when she arrived.
 
There is no reason not to believe the camp. There are many state agencies on site, to include LE, the media says the FBI, as well.

I don't believe all these agencies would leave mental/behavioral health clients in a dangerous situation. It's illegal, per the BH regulations and the NC Code, then add the federal code for abuse of mentally ill. Nope, don't see a cover up and risk going to prison.

They only have about 35 clients per the BH last inspection report, not a problem to move 35 kids.

moo
"the counselor said"
This counselor would be #1 on the list of suspects for the boy's unnatural death and until the investigation is complete there's no way in hell I'm giving this camp a pass on anything they say or do, nor should they get one.


"The counselor explained that the boy was required to sleep on the floor inside a sleeping bag, which in turn was inside a small tent called a bivy bag. Around midnight, the counselor said, the boy began to experience a panic attack, according to the search warrant documents.

Read more at: https://www.charlotteobserver.com/news/state/north-carolina/article285417377.html#storylink=cpy
 
There is no reason not to believe the camp. There are many state agencies on site, to include LE, the media says the FBI, as well.

I don't believe all these agencies would leave mental/behavioral health clients in a dangerous situation. It's illegal, per the BH regulations and the NC Code, then add the federal code for abuse of mentally ill. Nope, don't see a cover up and risk going to prison.

They only have about 35 clients per the BH last inspection report, not a problem to move 35 kids.

moo
I disagree. I believe a sizeable financial motivation exists for Trails Carolina to circle the wagons and lie so I will not be taking what they say at face value. I will follow authorities lead on this one and so far what they have indicated is that they are not getting the cooperation they would expect while investigating the unnatural death of a minor child in Trails care. JMO MOO
 
He was in an enclosed bivy, kinda sleeping bag tent.
Moo, maybe this gives the new camper privacy and used on the first night, per the media. He was able to exit, but an alarm would sound, no physical restraint, was inside the cabin, with I think, four others and two counselors.

I would think the Behavior Health Licensing staff, LE, and DSS would be aware of any nefarious reason by now. Even if they suspect, the law requires the removal of all clients/campers, immediately.
All the campers were indeed removed from the location. The warrants also reference restraints, the child's pants, and the unlawful denial of access to LE and social workers. Those are all significant red flags for nefarious activity. IMO

It's unclear if "bivy" was what the camp was euphemistically calling their contraption or if it was actually a bivy. From LE description, it didn't sound like any technical bivy I've seen, with a pole on one side, and the other side collapsed. If a bivy has a pole, the pole is at one end, not one side.

I note that any bivy is a form of restraint: your legs are down a tube, and this one was evidently zippered entirely closed, and was designed to stay that way (you could unzip it, but the alarm would go off, so it's not like you could keep it unzipped). The only way to get out of one of those things, even unzipped, would be to slither out. The bivy would have even less room to maneuver your legs because they also had a sleeping bag inside.

So far, we don't know if the zipper worked or was snagged. We don't know if the child's hands were pinned down the tube, and he couldn't get a pile of sleeping bag off his face. We don't know if he could roll over (I think not). We don't know if the "bivy" was tied down: I would not be able to get in or out of one of those things if it was tied down, and I know this, because I tried one once in a store. (Think of how difficult it would be to get out of a sleeping bag if it's tied down, especially if the legs are narrow). Most of all, we don't know why in the heck the camp would zip a camper into a bivy, let alone with a plastic ground cloth on the floor. Why weren't they on a bed, when there are all those bunks in the room?
 
The last three inspections took place in 2016, 2018 and 2019.
The last inspection 6/23.
That is incorrect for the current inspection dates. The article was 2021, when a former client filed a complaint 6/21, with the Behavioral Health Licensure Board.

The state visited the facility, unannounced on 6/21/21, interviewed 4 random clients, they found the complaint unfounded. Created action plan to better document when clients request to call parents.

Recent inspections ....
 
All the campers were indeed removed from the location. The warrants also reference restraints, the child's pants, and the unlawful denial of access to LE and social workers. Those are all significant red flags for nefarious activity. IMO

It's unclear if "bivy" was what the camp was euphemistically calling their contraption or if it was actually a bivy. From LE description, it didn't sound like any technical bivy I've seen, with a pole on one side, and the other side collapsed. If a bivy has a pole, the pole is at one end, not one side.

I note that any bivy is a form of restraint: your legs are down a tube, and this one was evidently zippered entirely closed, and was designed to stay that way (you could unzip it, but the alarm would go off, so it's not like you could keep it unzipped). The only way to get out of one of those things, even unzipped, would be to slither out. The bivy would have even less room to maneuver your legs because they also had a sleeping bag inside.

So far, we don't know if the zipper worked or was snagged. We don't know if the child's hands were pinned down the tube, and he couldn't get a pile of sleeping bag off his face. We don't know if he could roll over (I think not). We don't know if the "bivy" was tied down: I would not be able to get in or out of one of those things if it was tied down, and I know this, because I tried one once in a store. (Think of how difficult it would be to get out of a sleeping bag if it's tied down, especially if the legs are narrow). Most of all, we don't know why in the heck the camp would zip a camper into a bivy, let alone with a plastic ground cloth on the floor. Why weren't they on a bed, when there are all those bunks in the room?
I'm confused, nothing new.
I missed the article or was it in the warrant all kids were removed? I thought it was just the ones in the cabin.
Did you say the ones in the cabin were moved to a camp ones by the same group?
Thanks ....
 
FYI most bivvies are "waterproof breathable". This doesn't mean if you're buried in one you can actually breathe. Technical raingear is waterproof breathable to minimize sweat-moisture on the inside, and we all know "breathable" is not exactly what it is. But....you're also not emptying and filling your lungs in it. Your breath would actually be retained in the bivy. Depending on the quality of the bivy, it could be more or less like forcing a child to sleep in a plastic bag.
 
I'm confused, nothing new.
I missed the article or was it in the warrant all kids were removed? I thought it was just the ones in the cabin.
Did you say the ones in the cabin were moved to a camp ones by the same group?
Thanks ....
All the kids were moved to another camp location owned by the same company. The camp did this while not giving LE or social workers access to them. See ^^^^.
 
Why else are they let off with fines and not shut down?
I think its a combination of.....

- Camps are located in rural areas of southeren states that are not known for having alot of regulations, inspections, licensing requriments etc.

- I think a certain number of camps are "shells". They rent the property for the time required to hold the camp, provide counselors when the camp is running, but are largely an inter net site. If shut down under one name, they form a new camp under a different name. And... if I lose my license, then the new camp is under my wife's name etc.
 

Members online

Online statistics

Members online
97
Guests online
2,867
Total visitors
2,964

Forum statistics

Threads
595,158
Messages
18,020,400
Members
229,586
Latest member
C7173
Back
Top