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

[Quinnie]

I have not read the entire content of this thread so forgive me if this has already been mentioned. I've taken the liberty to upload two pictures published in the Daily Mail's original article side by side, LINK here.
What I noticed is that in close comparison though there 13 children in each picture it seems to me that the children (and the photos) are from several years apart. Particularly the older girls look year's older in the blue t-shirt picture, yet there are new baby's being held in both pictures. Is it possible that some of their children died? That's what these pictures suggest to me. Any thoughts?

This was on my mind too but I have put it down to those blue shirts being feminine cut on the girls and therefore giving them some sort of shape. The purple dresses are intentionally little girl dresses that hide any shape... that's just me trying to rationalise how the older girls almost look like they may have nourished bodies in the blue shirts.

However, I do think that there is likely some unfortunate victims that may not have survived this nightmare.

 

[they'll get you]

There are four boys in this one... wearing a matching shirt... someone tell me if I'm just seeing things?

One boy is wearing glasses so his eyes were cared for.

Who are the other three adults in this photo?


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

 

[madamx]

There are four boys in this one... wearing a matching shirt... someone tell me if I'm just seeing things?

wow great photo flourish!! I had not seen this one yet.. I just looked at the photo and for a second there yes, it looks like the same shirt the 3 sons are wearing, but I think the mystery boy has a pink heart on his shirt that the other shirts don't have.. I think he is with the other 4 people that are obviously not part of the family...they are not wearing the require matching Disney attire

 

[future criminologist]

For anyone fascinated by the apparent Disney obsession, there's a podcast called "This is Really Happening" that is personal life stories of real things that happened to the people narrating him. Episode #79 is called "What if the happiest place on Earth was your worst nightmare?" and it's about a woman whose father was so abusive and obsessed with Disney that he spent more money on Disneyland trips than food for his kids. His kids were starving but he would force them to go to Disneyland and go on the rides over and over again, the only movies they could watch were Disney movies, they had to memorize facts about Walt Disney, and they could only wear clothes from Disney. He was also extremely physically abusive and didn't even want his daughter to have a job or any independence because it meant time away from him and Disney. It was one of the first things I thought of seeing the photos of the kids on trips to Disney.

 

[ilovepierre]

O/T: please keep me in your thoughts. It is snowing, I’m in the south, power went off an hour ago and it’s supposed to be 17 degrees tonight.

That's only -8 (Celcius) in my neck of the woods 😂
Which is downright balmy in the winter.
Right after Christmas, it dropped to -40 a week and other parts of Canada recorded temps of -50°C

Stay warm, though!

 

[ilovepierre]

I wonder if the night-time outings were an odd "treat" - if the mother wouldn't take the kids out during the day and the kids got restless, dad would take them out for a drive at night... "you can't say I never take you anywhere!" sort of thing.
Usually with these house-of-horrors/ hidden children cases, there is an element of purpose and premeditation, because the children have a "job", but in this case, I think the parents are just hopelessly incompetent and didn't want to draw attention to their incompetence.
The children were starved probably primarily because it would be a mammoth task to provide three nutritious balanced meals for that many people every day. Much easier to cook a little candlelight supper for two and let the kids eat canned goods. They did things like gardening and driving at night so they wouldn't attract as much attention/ interaction as they would during the day.

BBM

I dunno if that's a good enough reason to not feed your kids.
The Gosselins were a family of 10 and they seemed to eat 3 balanced meals a day.

IMO

 

[Rocco]

BBM

I dunno if that's a good enough reason to not feed your kids.
The Gosselins were a family of 10 and they seemed to eat 3 balanced meals a day.

IMO

They had money for those trips to Disney and money for those trips to Vegas to renew their vows, and for the ceremonies complete with a new wedding dress for the well fed bride each time, so they had money for food. They also had adult children to help prepare it. They have no excuse for starving those kids.

 

[they'll get you]

BBM

I dunno if that's a good enough reason to not feed your kids.
The Gosselins were a family of 10 and they seemed to eat 3 balanced meals a day.

IMO

If those children were vegetarian or had never had any junk food then would their weight be much different?
As children we were never given any junk food or sugar drinks and we were on the thin side.




Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

 

[SandyQLS]

I have not read the entire content of this thread so forgive me if this has already been mentioned. I've taken the liberty to upload two pictures published in the Daily Mail's original article side by side, LINK here.
What I noticed is that in close comparison though there 13 children in each picture it seems to me that the children (and the photos) are from several years apart. Particularly the older girls look year's older in the blue t-shirt picture, yet there are new baby's being held in both pictures. Is it possible that some of their children died? That's what these pictures suggest to me. Any thoughts?

JMO but the blue shirts photo was immediately after the baby #13 was born. I think everyone is in # order right to left in photo:

top: #3, #2 boy, #1
2nd row: #5, mother+baby, father, #4 boy
3rd row: #9 boy, #8, #7, #6
4th row: #12, #11, #10

I think they all had haircuts before/for the renewal photo which was taken not much later judging from size of baby - but it is the same baby #13.

 

[ilovepierre]

They had money for those trips to Disney and money for those trips to Vegas to renew their vows, and for the ceremonies complete with a new wedding dress for the well fed bride each time, so they had money for food. They also had adult children to help prepare it. They have no excuse for starving those kids.

Exactly.
This wasn't an impoverished family.
They just chose to spend their money on things other than food

 

[ilovepierre]

If those children were vegetarian or had never had any junk food then would their weight be much different?
As children we were never given any junk food or sugar drinks and we were on the thin side.




Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

The Gosselin children?
I don't think they were vegetarian, and they didn't eat a lot (if any) junk food at all.
All those kids seemed to have normal weights and heights for their ages.


The Turpin children aren't just "on the thin side."
They're emaciated.
They don't look healthy at all.

IMO

 

[PrayDaily]

The two girls on the far left who are in gray shirts while the others are in pink shirts and pig tales look the palest to me. I think they are the older girls.

Sent from my SM-G920V using Tapatalk

how can u tell when they are blurred ?

 

[Quinnie]

They had money for those trips to Disney and money for those trips to Vegas to renew their vows, and for the ceremonies complete with a new wedding dress for the well fed bride each time, so they had money for food. They also had adult children to help prepare it. They have no excuse for starving those kids.

Not to mention the cost of 13 matching outfits and shoes including that expensive Disney merchandise.

 

[ilovepierre]

how can u tell when they are blurred ?

There's a few photos on this thread (in a link in what appears to be Russian) that shows non blurry photos of the family. If it's the picture I think the OP is referring to is the one that I think it is, it's one of those ones.

Here's the link: https://www.forumdaily.com/v-kalifornii-para-derzhala-na-cepi-13-detej/

 

[ilovepierre]

Not to mention the cost of 13 matching outfits and shoes including that expensive Disney merchandise.

Wouldn't have been cheap, that's for sure.
I know when I go to DL, I can easily spend $100 on a hoodie and a couple shirts! And that's just for one person!

 

[Meryl12]

Even if well-intentioned, IMO the family I've seen thus far in the media doesn't seem especially equipped to handle the needs of so many deeply damaged kids. This goes beyond "blood" here. The grandparents are elderly and alternately upset and in denial, the sister has her own struggles and large family...and the 13 kids who've been chronically damaged by "blood" are going to need a prolonged supportive environment headed up by someone who is extraordinarily equipped (psychologically and otherwise) to deal with their unique challenges. I'm not sure any family member could be expected to be up to the task, but especially not in this situation, it seems. JMO, IMHO

:goodpost:
I agree Poirotry, I think this is the result of generational abuse (IMO) on both sides.

 

[margarita25]

Comments on the jeans?

 

[margarita25]

There is a picture of what appears to be rope on a bedframe from the home they lived in back in Texas �� ��
Source: https://m.facebook.com/story.php?story_fbid=1801580073198454&id=108571612499317

Per the video, it is claimed a man called CPS back in the 90s, if I understood correctly.

 

[margarita25]

Not to mention the cost of 13 matching outfits and shoes including that expensive Disney merchandise.

I think the clothes might have been Sound of Music style? (Nothing wrong with this in itself, of course)

 

[ilovepierre]

Comments on the jeans?

They appear to be too big for all the children/adult children.
The younger kids have their jeans rolled up, and on the older ones, the jeans just kinda hang off them.

IMO