CA - 13 victims, ages 2 to 29, shackled in home by parents, Perris, 15 Jan 2018 #1

[Doghairrules]

As a forensic psychologist, this is why I think David and Louise Turpin may have held their children captive

http://www.independent.co.uk/voices...rnia-captives-psychology-motive-a8162136.html



He also points out that the eldest child in the house was reported to be age 29, born 2 yrs before David & Louise married.

Is that correct? Didn’t they claim to be celebrating a 30th anniversary with Elvis a couple of years ago?

 

[enelram]

There's a difference between home schooling and a school. This was called a school and had a principal, Mr. David Turpin, according to records. https://www.cde.ca.gov/SchoolDirectory/details?cdscode=33752006140701

In my area, if you notify the state that you will be homeschooling, you must be aligned w/ a bonafide registered school
to monitor the curriculum, testing, etc. they probably said they are a school so they would not have an outside school
checking up on things. The school in my area that homeschoolers register with does not seem to be very highly
rated and is religion based.

 

[SCHMAE]

THIS. 95+% of homeschool parents are committed to the best interests of their child.

How can we identify those who use the guise of homeschooling to isolate and potentially abuse their children -- and so so without penalizing or being ovely onerous to the vast majority of good actors?

Amen. I did not homeschool but I totally applaud anyone who can and wants to. Homeschooling is not the issue but there does need to be some way that to keep an eye on kids who may fall through the cracks. Did these kids go to the doctor often? Ever? I notice the oldest boy has glasses and the middle boy may need glasses and does not, so I feel like ( speculative) at some point they stopped getting medical attention for the kids.

 

[Doghairrules]

However, you call CPS, and the police doesn't mean they'll investigate without evidence first. I reported a pre-teen who told us her mom's new bf was always touching her. CPS said there's nothing we can do until he rapes her. They told the mom not to have her bf overnight anymore. That's it. Nothing happened.

Wow. That is not right.

I’ve called cps on folks twice - once when I worked in a department store and was concerned about a regular customer and her baby and another time when I watched a dad backhand is 10-ish year old daughter in a bowling alley parking lot. They provided parenting ed to the mom, which is what I asked for and substantiated abuse with the dad and worked with the family for most of a year. I didn’t get details of what they did with the family but at least they got on someone’s radar. I was so concerned about that little girl - if he would hit her like that in public, wth would he do to her in private??

 

[blue22]

THIS. 95+% of homeschool parents are committed to the best interests of their child.

How can we identify those who use the guise of homeschooling to isolate and potentially abuse their children -- and so so without penalizing or being ovely onerous to the vast majority of good actors?

I honestly have no idea. People on the fringe are hard to keep tabs on, from a societal standpoint. Say there are super rigid homeschool regulations put in place. I really think people like this would just find ways around them. I have no answers. I sometimes wonder if there are any...

 

[bears10]

THIS. 95+% of homeschool parents are committed to the best interests of their child.

How can we identify those who use the guise of homeschooling to isolate and potentially abuse their children -- and so so without penalizing or being ovely onerous to the vast majority of good actors?

Homeschooling has been a part of 3 cases I’ve been following lately (including this case, but not including older cases like Israel Keyes, Adam Lanza etc). It seems as if it’s way too easy for homeschooled kids to fall through the cracks, or be sheltered in a way that may lead them to be easy targets for manipulators in the future. I don’t want to think about the potential abuse that goes on under the guise of homeschooling that no one is aware of. And of course these things can happen to anyone in the public school system as well. But homeschooling gives abusers a very convenient way to keep their victims away from mandatory reporters.

While I personally couldn’t imagine giving up my autonomy to homeschool (especially considering what we pay in taxes! Lol) I can understand why parents would want to if they live in a not-great school system. So I’m not saying homeschooling is bad by any means... to each their own. But I worry about the parents/guardians who have bad intentions and use homeschooling to their advantage.




Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[gitana1]

We also protect the rights of minor children, those who aren't old enough to make their own choices and take care of themselves. This is really an issue of the state needing to protect the rights of minors from abuse. Their rights count, too. They have a right to be well fed and live in a safe, clean environment. They also have the right to formal education until they're age 18.

Since we're seeing a rise in child abuse in situations where children are schooled at home, perhaps the best option is to require parents who are home schooling children to bring them into school periodically for the same educational testing and health checks (vision, hearing, etc.) that kids in public schools receive. It would give authorities the opportunity to make sure home schooled children are being properly educated and are receiving adequate nutrition and health care.

Not really. We try to protect the welfare of kids, but they have few rights. And parents have a lot more freedom in this country when it comes to raising kids than in some other, developed, Western nations.

Corporal punishment is allowed. Homeschooling is allowed. Isolation is allowed. Brainwashing is allowed.

Some of that is limited in other countries to some degree.

The history of our nation views parental rights as vastly more important than children's rights. Kids are still viewed as the property of their parents in many ways.

And believe me, I fully understand the concept of not wanting government control of child rearing. But I would have to say that the welfare of kids takes a back seat to the rights of their parents.

 

[Doghairrules]

In real life, I knew a woman who said her parents were so in love with each other, they had no time or feeling for their children. I guess it does happen that way.

Patty Davis used to say that about the Reagans.

 

[osu]

Sister of Louise Turpin speaks out

Video:
https://www.facebook.com/WYFF4/videos/10156144962114114/


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Coffeequeen]

I'm getting a very patriarchal vibe from the father's history. It could be that he's also compulsive about these behaviors. Since there are indications there's some form of religion involved, it's most likely the father is the one who is making the rules and controlling the behavior of the wife and children. It would explain his taking a child/wife who was much younger and hadn't even completed high school.

I'm getting the same vibe. I think they're both most definitely guilty. But my theory is this started with David. Something about him marrying her when she was 16, the glazed over adoration in her eyes when she looks at him, and his soulless eyes gives me the creeps. This whole thing is bizarre and like a bad train wreck. I can't look away. I think whatever has been going on has been going on for a long time and it is engrained in their "children." I saw upthread that no sexual abuse has been established, but honestly I will be *shocked* if there was no sexual abuse going on in this home. Possibly from both parents.

MOO

 

[gitana1]

I'm confused as to why everyone is assuming the guilt of the mother and questioning why the father didn't help. It was more than likely a folie à deux rather than a good parent/bad parent situation.

Oh I agree. This was a perfect storm due to two, dysfunctional people, IMO.

So those "boys" in the pictures are now 25 (almost 26) and 22. The latest picture I saw was 2016, so not that long ago. Even if it was a full two years ago they do not look anywhere close to 20 and 23 in those pictures. 

I was looking at the three girls in this Vegas wedding video (start around 14:36) and realized these girls are probably teenagers. Horrifying. When they speak briefly in the microphone, their voices are very high pitched, like little children. It almost sounds like they don't even speak often.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=V_FShQVnJIw&feature=youtu.be

ETA: The poor boy at 24:00. He looks so thin. This video was made in 2013, so those kids were malnourished even then.

Holy smokes. Can anyone explain this? That kid was 18 by my accounts in that video in 2013. He looks to be about 11 or 12!!!

(On a side note, the Elvis impersonator looks more like Scott Baio. And I also want to know hat he has to say!!!!)

 

[Coffeequeen]

I was looking at the three girls in this Vegas wedding video (start around 14:36) and realized these girls are probably teenagers. Horrifying. When they speak briefly in the microphone, their voices are very high pitched, like little children. It almost sounds like they don't even speak often.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=V_FShQVnJIw&feature=youtu.be

ETA: The poor boy at 24:00. He looks so thin. This video was made in 2013, so those kids were malnourished even then.

I noticed all of that too. None of their voices sounded quite right. I realize people have different pitches but each voice sounded younger than it should coming from the children I saw (who each were most likely a lot older than they appear). Terrifying to think of what these kids went through. Those videos were downright painful to watch.

 

[rsd1200]

The children, especially the boys look very thin and emaciated. The baby the mom is holding doesn't look healthy either, with thin forearms. The little girl wearing boots standing in front of the boys is very thin with a distended stomach, another sign of being malnourished. The little girl dressed in black on the far right has very skinny arms. I notice this family and the Turpins have a tendency to dress their kids in bulky, baggy clothing which hides their thin bodies.

http://rodriguesfamilyministries.com/main/wp-content/uploads/2017/04/cropped-Website-cover-1.jpg

They remind me of the coat hanger models. The clothing would just hangs on the models, and the models would be very malnourished looking. They used to call it "heroin-chic".

 

[jenves]

Forgive me if this has been brought up recently, I’m a few pages behind.
To some degree I completely get that the extended family would not see a red flag concerning the children based on not speaking to them. That is if we were actually thinking in normal terms. SO HUGE RED FLAG....when you don’t hear of graduation from high school/college, moving to their first apt/house plans, marriage plans, baby plans...I honestly think the majority of these kids are mentally delayed (whether genetically or by abuse). How else can you not think it’s odd that none of these kids seem to become adults?

That is ODD. PERIOD. JMO


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[osu]

Here’s photos of their cars, some with Disney plates.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[enelram]

Gitana1, there's a video online where "Elvis" was interviewed. He remembered them as return customers but I don't believe he said anything of much importance.

 

[Hippononymous]

The Vegas wedding video is one of the strangest things I have ever seen.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[strawberry]

And doesn’t that appear to be grandparents in that picture?

Yes, but must be the dad's parents that's not her mom.

 

[gitana1]

Not the way CPS or child/APS statutes work. Really. They can interview kids (or incapable adults) that anyone calls about for a welfare check without any parental consent or warrant. They legally don’t even have to notify the parents that they are doing so if the parents or caregivers are not home when they come. CPS/APS does not have to adhere to any legal burden of proof or warrant like LE does to come into a home or conduct interviews, demand to see the children, etc.. No one EVER called. A possible CPS case or follow up may be why they moved from TX to begin with. A previous poster said that child welfare workers can potentially follow or find cases state to state but I know of at least a few people who I have distant ties to who were repeatedly reported by family to social services as having literally moved to the next county, next county, etc. to avoid CPS. And those kids were in public schools.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Yes. They can interview without consent if they catch the kids at school, or someone opens the door and allows them in. But parents have the absolute right to deny entry or interviews. So if the children are at their home and being homeschooled, there would be no way for CPS to interview or inspect without parental permission. Then CPS must call the police and obtain a warrant in order to interview or remove.

And there are strict guidelines for removal. They can;t just take them based on suspicion, while investigating. They must have a sound basis for believing there is imminent harm to the kids. And when they do, they must then contact LE who must then remove the kids based on the equivalent of probable cause. That's California law:

• Exigent Circumstances: Circumstances in which a social worker has reasonable cause to believe the child is a person described by WIC § 300 (b) or (g), and the child has an immediate need for medical care, or the child is at imminent risk of serious physical injury and there is no time to obtain a court order. [WIC § 306; Rogers v County of San Joaquin (2007) 487 F. 3d 1288]
• Reasonable Belief: Law enforcement can place a child into protective custody when the officer has reasonable cause to the believe the child is a person described by WIC § 300, and the child has an immediate need for medical care, or is at imminent risk of serious physical injury and there is no time to obtain a court order. [WIC § 306; Rogers v County of San Joaquin (2007) 487 F. 3d 1288]

Underlined by me.

https://www.attorney-sacramento.com/areas-of-practice/child-custody/child-protective-services-2/

 

[rsd1200]

JMO
I agree.

The poor children is all I keep thinking about. Being somewhat isolated from society's norms and not knowing any different because all their "teachings" are coming from inside the family.

They probably did not even know that real emotional and developmental harm was being done to them.

For people that may not see the emotional and mental harm that happens in families with such extreme and unique religous teachings then I just keep going back to the Bevers case. It finally hit a breaking point in that family until the two young brothers killed almost the entire family.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Broken_Arrow_killings

O/T That was just awful. I remember hearing about it at the time but never read the entire thing.

Didn't OP say one of the kids left home, and married? Maybe that's when they started chaining the kids? I don't have a link about one child leaving and marrying but thought I'd read up thread that there was one. :thinking: