CA - 13 victims, ages 2 to 29, shackled in home by parents, Perris, 15 Jan 2018 #11

DNA Solves
DNA Solves
DNA Solves
Status
Not open for further replies.
I don’t see CA on the list in your first link though.


https://www.cde.ca.gov/sp/ps/psfaq.asp#a25

Are public funds available for private school tuition?

No. There are no state programs in California that offer public funding for private school tuition, except where a student with a disability is placed in a non-public school by a public school district.


IMO I truly do not think they homeschooled for the money. They homeschooled so they could abuse and torture their children with no oversight.

Not for private school, but aren't there charter school vouchers in CA? aha! Just answered my own question: https://edsource.org/2017/most-california-voters...back...school-vouchers.../588390
Oct 5, 2017 - Twice before, in 1993 and 2000, 70 percent of Californians voted against tax- funded school vouchers after extensive opposition campaigns led by the California Teachers Association. ... "

I only got interested in this after watching DeVos smile vacuously while trying to answer Stahl's questions...

I wholeheartedly agree that homeschooling for them, was to hide the children. But, that still leaves the question of why did DT want to register it? Do all homeschooling parents register their homes as a business?
 
MATT GUTMAN
Good Morning America March 19, 2018 https://www.yahoo.com/gma/exclusive...e-freedom-090803244--abc-news-topstories.html

That 17-year-old sibling had only been on social media for a few weeks when she began chatting with a man who told her what's happening in her home was wrong, encouraged her to escape and alert authorities.


RBBM Thanks.
Not sure but it doesn't match up with what the DA stated in his press conference on Jan 18, 2018. He said they had been planning the escape for 2 yrs.
The whole being on social media and YouTube didn't match up either but clearly it was the young lady who escaped. And then it was taken down.

Here is an article

POSTED: JAN 18 2018 11:21AM PST
VIDEO POSTED: JAN 19 2018 02:10PM PST
UPDATED: JAN 19 2018 02:17PM PST
RIVERSIDE, CA (FOX 11 / AP)
<snip>
And yet, some of the children of David and Louise Turpin hatched an escape plan. It took two years to carry out but last weekend a 17-year-old girl and her sister climbed out of the window of their Southern California home. The other girl turned back out of fear but the teen persisted and called 911. http://www.ktvu.com/home/parents-of-13-malnourished-children-charged-bail-set-at-13-million

DA press conf 5:30 mark is where DA states that the 17 year old had been working on plan for 2 years
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fZWpX62z5Mg

It could simply be that two years ago, the children sensed that what was happening was wrong (maybe after witnessing a particularly horrible bout of abuse) and finally decided that enough was enough. They may have begun expressing among themselves the desire to somehow get out of their circumstances. Since that time they may have been idly chatting when alone together, throwing out various far-fetched scenarios for escape almost as a form of entertainment, the way that hungry people are known to fantasize aloud about food with one another. With so little knowledge of the outside world, their plans might have been as simple as "Let's all go out the door when Dad is asleep and hide in the bushes until he stops looking for us." When the 17-year-old was informed about how 9-1-1 works by the online contact, she may have relayed the information to her siblings, and the kids were able to work that new information into a new and more realistic plan for escape in the weeks leading up to the actual rescue. Afterward, they might truthfully say that they had been "planning" to escape for two years, because how could they have known that some of their ideas were unrealistic? Both time-frames could be true at once if you look at things from the point of view of the children themselves.

(This is all speculation, of course.)
 
This seems like the charter schools are the ones giving them the money to spend on specific educational needs, not just a check from the California state comptroller for the parents to use as they see fit.

Educational Funds&#8211;Charter schools for homeschoolers offer educational funds. There are multiple charter schools and each competes to attract and retain students. The charter school I selected spends, on each student&#8217;s behalf, $2600/year to use with vendors to provide for a well-rounded education. The parents direct what they want to spend their funds on and the choices are colossal.

https://edsource.org/2017/10-things-to-know-about-charter-schools/583984

Don't the charter schools get federal money? In some states, yes they do. I don't know where that California charter school is getting the funds to pay $2600 per student. It all seems pretty convoluted. This is part of the big brouhaha (I agree) that money that would go to public school is being funneled into charter schools thereby depriving the majority of already underfunded.

Honestly, it's sometimes pretty frustrating trying to find complete information even though Google pretty much tells us everything, lol!

*off to continue Googling*
 
Not for private school, but aren't there charter school vouchers in CA? aha! Just answered my own question: https://edsource.org/2017/most-california-voters...back...school-vouchers.../588390
Oct 5, 2017 - Twice before, in 1993 and 2000, 70 percent of Californians voted against tax- funded school vouchers after extensive opposition campaigns led by the California Teachers Association. ... "

I only got interested in this after watching DeVos smile vacuously while trying to answer Stahl's questions...

I wholeheartedly agree that homeschooling for them, was to hide the children. But, that still leaves the question of why did DT want to register it? Do all homeschooling parents register their homes as a business?

They were NOT registered as a business. They registered as a private homeschool. It's one of the ways to homeschool in California. Signing an affidavit to register as a private school in California only means they are privately schooling at home. Nothing more. IMO, they went this route, because the other ways of homeschooling require much more oversight. (Such as going through an umbrella charter or satellite program, enroll in an independent study program, have a certified tutor.) The other ways would have required oversight, documentation, proof, etc.
 
Don't the charter schools get federal money? In some states, yes they do. I don't know where that California charter school is getting the funds to pay $2600 per student. It all seems pretty convoluted. This is part of the big brouhaha (I agree) that money that would go to public school is being funneled into charter schools thereby depriving the majority of already underfunded.

Honestly, it's sometimes pretty frustrating trying to find complete information even though Google pretty much tells us everything, lol!

*off to continue Googling*

You can only get money from a charter school, if you school under their umbrella. You have to meet all the requirements to do so. This includes all kinds of checks and balances.
 
I don't know. But the Hospital CEO would and he's concerned. Also, the lawyer seemed to be in favor of the contact and I think he would know, maybe?
It wouldn’t be encouraged where I practice. Not forbidden most likely, but certainly not encouraged. We may sent cards or small gifts as a group, but not visits.
 
Not for private school, but aren't there charter school vouchers in CA? aha! Just answered my own question: https://edsource.org/2017/most-california-voters...back...school-vouchers.../588390
Oct 5, 2017 - Twice before, in 1993 and 2000, 70 percent of Californians voted against tax- funded school vouchers after extensive opposition campaigns led by the California Teachers Association. ... "

I only got interested in this after watching DeVos smile vacuously while trying to answer Stahl's questions...

I wholeheartedly agree that homeschooling for them, was to hide the children. But, that still leaves the question of why did DT want to register it? Do all homeschooling parents register their homes as a business?

But they weren’t a charter school. And I HIGHLY doubt they were receiving funds from a charter school since that requires interaction and proof.

I don’t think they were a “business”. They probably registered as a private school bc -


Probably for reasons having to do with the separation of church and state, the California statutes are very clear that government has no right to inspect any private school teacher qualifications, student work, curriculum or the like. Local health and safety ordinances may apply to larger schools, but understand that no one is entitled to see or inspect anything relating to your school other than what is explicitly stated in the law.

http://www.hsc.org/establishing-your-own-private-school.html

——-


Anyone who homeschools at least six students — as the Turpin family apparently did — must file to form their own “private school.”

That’s why their Muir Woods Road house shares an address with Sandcastle Day School, a private school whose only students were the Turpins’.

https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.pe...r-new-scrutiny-after-perris-torture-case/amp/
 
They were NOT registered as a business. They registered as a private homeschool. It's one of the ways to homeschool in California. Signing an affidavit to register as a private school in California only means they are privately schooling at home. Nothing more. IMO, they went this route, because the other ways of homeschooling require much more oversight. (Such as going through an umbrella charter or satellite program, enroll in an independent study program, have a certified tutor.) The other ways would have required oversight, documentation, proof, etc.

Thank you, what I'm trying to say doesn't always come out my fingers. :/ I know he wasn't registering it as a 'business', but couldn't remember what he was registering it as. Ah, "private homeschool".

Good information, it's what I wanted to know. I had no idea there were different types of home school to register. I'm actually kind of shocked that there is such a thing as having being able to have less oversight or standards for a child's education. Y'know... to try and prevent this abusive situation of adults with only a 1st grade education.
 
Hasn't the subject of homeschooling being discussed in depth on earlier threads? This is just one aspect concerning how the parents got away with the abuse and going over and over it is tedious.

Sent from my Moto G (5) using Tapatalk
 
https://edsource.org/2017/10-things-to-know-about-charter-schools/583984

Don't the charter schools get federal money? In some states, yes they do. I don't know where that California charter school is getting the funds to pay $2600 per student. It all seems pretty convoluted. This is part of the big brouhaha (I agree) that money that would go to public school is being funneled into charter schools thereby depriving the majority of already underfunded.

Honestly, it's sometimes pretty frustrating trying to find complete information even though Google pretty much tells us everything, lol!

*off to continue Googling*

I agree and I think that whole ordeal the blog lady posted about is shady. Not saying the blogger herself is shady, but the situation doesn’t seem right to me. JMO
 
Thank you, what I'm trying to say doesn't always come out my fingers. :/ I know he wasn't registering it as a 'business', but couldn't remember what he was registering it as. Ah, "private homeschool".

Good information, it's what I wanted to know. I had no idea there were different types of home school to register. I'm actually kind of shocked that there is such a thing as having being able to have less oversight or standards for a child's education. Y'know... to try and prevent this abusive situation of adults with only a 1st grade education.

Me too.

Children, the last ones to get rights. Even dogs and cats have more rights. We don&#8217;t allow puppy mills.
 
Hasn't the subject of homeschooling being discussed in depth on earlier threads? This is just one aspect concerning how the parents got away with the abuse and going over and over it is tedious.

Sent from my Moto G (5) using Tapatalk

It’s being discussed because a news article stated that LT and DT were benefiting financially from homeschooling. So we are trying to see if that could be accurate or not.
 
We homeschooled until last year. We were considering moving to California where my parents retired and is not in an area where I like the schools. I extensively researched homeschooling in California. We live in Texas (with great schools now which we attend) and nothing is required of homeschoolers. Any kind of requirements was a whole new world to me. I inquired with the district, charter schools, superintendent, etc.

1. Signing an affidavit for a private school does not make you a private school. They cannot receive benefits or funds, could not school other children, were not a business, etc. Registering as a private school, just deems your family ONLY a "private school." AKA: a homeschool family doing their own thing in their own home. You CAN maintain a private school in your home, but this is not what they did. There is a whole litany of things you have to do to maintain a private school in the home. If you school a certain number of your own children, the affidavit is a requirement anyway

2. In California, you can receive funds for educational purposes if you school under the umbrella of a charter. This money is not just handed off to you. There are documentation requirements, contracts are signed, credentialed teachers oversee these programs, you have to prove you are doing what you say, you cannot use religious materials, etc. Generally, in the contract there is an agreement to do standardized testing. The parent can opt out, but will not usually be welcome to return to the charter.

3. You can homeschool under a certidfied and credentialed teacher or tutor. (A parent can do this if they are a credentialed teacher.)

4. You can homeschool under a private satellite program. You are held to compulsory attendance standards and educational standards.

5. You receive no federal or state tax deductions for homeschooling. You receive no money from the state for homeschooling. You are not recognized as a functioning private school business, you receive no tax breaks for homeschooling with a private school affidavit. The affidavit gets you no benefits from the state. The ONLY way to receive money for educational purposes, is through am existing public charter school.

Hope that helps.

ETA: I cannot think of a way homeschooling could have benefited them financially.

I am totally for regulations over homeschooling families. Though we don't homeschool anymore, I would have happily submitted to all kinds of regulation. Most families are doing the right things when homeschooling their children, but the laws as they are leaves lot of room for vulnerability. IMO
 
But it can be. That was a choice by their public guardian, who the hospital CEO is concerned with.

Uffer, who spent part of the interview choking back tears, said the siblings came to the hospital bereft of everything.
Uffer says he is concerned with the public guardian, which has cut off all contact between the children and the hospital, despite psychologists and the siblings’ own attorney’s recognition that continuity of care for the siblings is critical to their recovery.
The public guardian said she could not comment.
http://abcnews.go.com/US/exclusive-...=clicksource_4380645_9_hero_headlines_bsq_hed



I don't know if this would apply:

[FONT=&quot]The state of California offers me, a homeschooling parent, $2600/year in educational funds for each of my kids. I, along with so many other homeschooling families in California, have crafted a customized and well-rounded education that reflects our family’s interests, priorities, learning styles, and values.
[/FONT]

https://thecontemporaryhomeschooler...ornia-pays-me-to-customize-my-kids-education/

I absolutely could not agree more with your thoughts about keeping contact with the hospital staff or at least one point of contact there. I feel it is extreme and it’s almost like they are being punished yet again. They are adults and have never been able to make decisions for themselves. And now here we are again. They obviously want to keep in touch with the wonderful people they have bonded with but are not allowed to. It is so critical for their mental health...the coordination of care. I can only hope that this isn’t permanent. Maybe they will eventually quietly arrange visitation but are not making that public to avoid the media. I feel so bad. [emoji22]


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
Hasn't the subject of homeschooling being discussed in depth on earlier threads? This is just one aspect concerning how the parents got away with the abuse and going over and over it is tedious.

Sent from my Moto G (5) using Tapatalk

I am very interested because I am wondering what they did with all of their money and how much money did they have.

I wonder how much they treated themselves. David made an excellent salary. And we know that money did not go for food, water, clothing, toys, shoes, or activities for the children. They did not have a big tax liability because they could deduct 13 children Even though several were adults, David provided 100% for their expenses.

I wondered if their school was another way to increase their income
 
I sent him an email.



Yes but it's about how the media reports. They use "man" for any legal adult. So my point is that the person corresponding with her might have been very young and didn't know what to do except tell her to go for help. My brother in laws would not know now and they're all in their 20's already.



That could indeed be the motivation but first, they weren't asking for the location of the kids. They were asking to be able to give the kids their phone numbers.Second, there are going to be workers at the home and there are multiple other people involved with the siblings who could also accidentally divulge that info. Third, the half-brother is undergoing a background check and seems to believe he will be able to contact the siblings once that's been done, now that they;re released, which to me, if true, is much more problematic considering he can't keep off t.v. exploiting these people. Fourth, while there is the possibility that in calls their location could be revealed to the hospital staff, and then the hospital staff might tell someone, IMO, whatever that's worth, that possibility is not close to as dangerous as ripping away the first real attachment form a caregiver that they've likely had.



Ah. Got it.

Oh please keep us posted on the lawyer’s response. You make very good points on why the privacy and secrecy is not the reason for this move.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
I am very interested because I am wondering what they did with all of their money and how much money did they have.

I wonder how much they treated themselves. David made an excellent salary. And we know that money did not go for food, water, clothing, toys, shoes, or activities for the children. They did not have a big tax liability because they could deduct 13 children Even though several were adults, David provided 100% for their expenses.

I wondered if their school was another way to increase their income

Parents can claim their children up to age 19, or age 24 if they are a student. So quite a few of the kids were likely no longer deductions.

I wouldn’t be surprised if LT is a hoarder, which is where a lot of money could have gone. Plus their 3 cars and DTs paycheck deductions for his 401k and multiple life insurance policies. I have a feeling the parents treated themselves quite a bit. I mean, the upkeep on DTs stylish coif couldn’t have been cheap.
 
But it can be. That was a choice by their public guardian, who the hospital CEO is concerned with.

Uffer, who spent part of the interview choking back tears, said the siblings came to the hospital bereft of everything.
Uffer says he is concerned with the public guardian, which has cut off all contact between the children and the hospital, despite psychologists and the siblings’ own attorney’s recognition that continuity of care for the siblings is critical to their recovery.
The public guardian said she could not comment.
http://abcnews.go.com/US/exclusive-...=clicksource_4380645_9_hero_headlines_bsq_hed



I don't know if this would apply:

[FONT=&quot]The state of California offers me, a homeschooling parent, $2600/year in educational funds for each of my kids. I, along with so many other homeschooling families in California, have crafted a customized and well-rounded education that reflects our family’s interests, priorities, learning styles, and values.
[/FONT]

https://thecontemporaryhomeschooler...ornia-pays-me-to-customize-my-kids-education/

The public guardian is way out of line here and obviously knows nothing about healing from trauma. She should be replaced ASAP.
 
I think any time dominance and overbearing-ness moves into the realm of bullying and abuse that it has become a pathology, and I don't see what difference gender makes in that.

We're not conjecturing a dominant female here, we're talking about severe abuse.

I suppose I do tend to think that the most dominant partner in a relationship/marriage is likely to be the one who is also dominant in abuse where abuse of minors or dependents is present? I suppose that might not always be the case if the subservient partner is the primary carer, but I don't know what the interplay might be in such a scenario. I think we need to learn more to understand what the interplay has been with DT and LT, and we might never get that information.

re: severe abuse vs dominant female
agreed she is an abuser but the "chain of command" isn't lateral. All this talk about how "quiet" and vaguely "effeminant" DT is rubs me the wrong way and I think people are not sensitive to this because they aren't even aware of the language they are using to describe the situation and the reasons why they might be using that language.

"david with along with" that's a type of speculation that seems to favor one side. The ":LT is the mastermind and controls DT" side.
Again, David "went along" - lessening his responsibility.
I can´t believe it! His interest in Louise started when she was 10! 10!!!!!
He is a paedophile, yet everything is on Louise!

I am close to wanting to stop following this case, I get more and more upset and find myself in the position of defending Louise, which I don´t really want to do.

I need a break, for sure!

this plus "he looks effeminate" etc., it's like come on, men can certainly make their own decisions despite how "quiet" or vaguely "effeminate" they are. you can't say "we're blaming them both equally" and then go on to use language that clearly says different with stuff like "DT went along with"

I'm in the same boat as SATA (and am just going to stop following this thread because people don't understand what I'm talking about)
 
It is sad, but I think they also have to be very careful about security. The nurses, technicians and support staff might be trusted not to reveal things when the young people are patients, but they may feel less of an obligation to keep phone numbers and whereabouts secret. Even if they didn't deliberately disclose where the young people could be found, they might be followed by the press.

There is no reason to believe that the young people won't be allowed to skype the hospital and check in with their friends at the hospital, and it is possible that they will return for visits if they get outpatient care at Corona.

Hospital staff, like teachers, are used to having to say good bye to people they become attached to. And the young people need to learn that modern life is about relationships that get interrupted. All of us who went to school, to summer camp, to whatever, have known that every stage (small or large) in our lives brings new relationships and ends old ones. These kids have lived in isolation from this rhythm. If they have good support in their new home, I trust they will grow from the experience.

Yes, but...for most people when they move on to a different school or leave school there will be continuity of other relationships. These young people have gone from a home with all their siblings together every day and night, to being split into two groups in different hospitals, they've developed special relationships with the staff that would not normally develop due to these young people needing a totally different type of care, compounded by them not having visits from a loving family. Then they're split into three groups. These splits are going to be a lot to cope with. All these changes in a short period of time are going to be mindblowing. They're also facing the prospect of telling details of what happened to the attorneys as well as to therapists and possibly having to stand up in court and tell people and face cross-examination. On the one hand they should have therapists helping them with validation, and then they might have cross-examination which is about invalidation.

Apparently some of the hospital staff were willing to work with the siblings for a while in a transition period, surely they would be willing to sign non-disclosure agreements? And wherever the siblings go, surely someone can show them how to hide the originating phone number? Or they could use a burner phone rather than a landline.

Having a trustworthy outsider could be very important for them in a lot of ways. Aside from that I'm sure the hospital staff will want to send cards for birthdays and Christmas for years to come.

Like Gitana's saying, we need these young people to be able to learn to forge healthy relationships in the future; they haven't had a good example in this from their parents. We've heard of possible fear of loss issues already existing. It's only going to compound any problems by doing the same thing with loving people that their parents may have done with toys. I couldn't read the article Gitana linked to (problem my end) but Gitana said something about them trying to get out of the cars and run back to the staff? They're supposed to be easing issues like anxiety, loss, ptsd, trust issues when they've apparently grown up with a lot of mental cruelty directed at them. They need to learn hard and clear that those things are wrong. Repeating mental cruelty in this way is giving them a mixed message, that it was wrong for their parents to do something like that, but it's okay when it comes to the new guardian?

I had thought maybe the psychologists had thought this was a good idea. I hadn't thought it through then, I had only my own issues as a lens through which to interpret it. I thought maybe the attorney wanted control of those who the siblings open up to in order to gather information for court? That would be a cold reason in itself, but I don't really think that would be hampered by having someone call them and say "I hope you're okay, I'm still here, I still think about you, I still care about you even at a distance, and I would love to chat for ten minutes and hear some of your news." These people are medical professionals, they're outside the wider family structure, they have no biases other than wanting what's best for the siblings.

We've all been trying to reassure each other through these threads that the siblings won't be let down again. And now it feels like they have been.

There's nothing I can do about it but to note my discomfort with the decision.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Members online

Online statistics

Members online
179
Guests online
1,962
Total visitors
2,141

Forum statistics

Threads
600,094
Messages
18,103,620
Members
230,986
Latest member
eluluwho
Back
Top