CA - 13 victims, ages 2 to 29, shackled in home by parents, Perris, 15 Jan 2018 #9

[rsd1200]

I doubt Louise cooked. I don't think she new how. The children were probably given just enough to stay alive with only one meal a day. The pies that they tortured the kids with leaving on the counter, I am sure were store bought. There were Vienna Sausage cans all over the house. I don't any fruits or vegetables or grains. What do you think they were given for their one meal?


Satch

She may not have known how to cook, and never learned. They instead, may have just grabbed takeout when they had no children, and then, when their children grew up off the bottle/breast, they just started giving them cans of Viennas. Cheap, easy, and, they are a meat product... It may not have always been Viennas for dinner either. Maybe they bought in bulk, and just got a pallet of whatever easy, canned food, was on sale at the time. Give everyone a can and call it a day.

 

[Zelda1010]

Well it's a defense but I'm very hopeful it won't work here.

It has nothing to do with knowledge of the law. It has to do with intent. If you break into a house because someone is chasing you and you're trying to hide, that not burglary. If you're breaking in to steal, that is.

But I take heart in the community outrage. And there are a host of charges. Like false imprisonment. Neglect. Sexual abuse.

I think they will go away for the rest of their lives. I hope so.

I should go back to school for many many years. This is off topic....

I think I'm half answering my own question, but...

A person under the influence of Ambien doesn't have an intent to be unlawful and get behind the wheel. The inebriated/fugue state renders them unable to give consent for, say, sex, but doesn't give them a legal leg to stand on in a vehicular manslaughter case. But, as you point out in this case.... this is where I sort of answer my own question....that is where the different levels and kinds of charges come in. The DA in their interest of justice would *hopefully* pursue a reduced charge that takes everything into consideration. Without the checks and balances of the defense attorney, overinflated charges would stand too easily.

So, I think the moral of my story is I hope that they are afforded a righteous defense that puts them behind bars for as long as possible. No less than 29 years if I had my druthers. Ninety five has a nice ring to it though.

 

[gitana1]

I think they're valid questions. I think they developed their own logic in all of this. But I don't really think there can have been a lot of future planning involved. I would think it was more a case of answer each problem as it comes up.

Maybe hoarding the children like possessions is accurate. But do LT and DT ever have a point where they realize that they're not going to allow the eldest children have a 'normal' pathway to adulthood, getting a job, leaving home, developing their own lives? I don't get the sense they were preparing the siblings for that, but that might have been coincidental and not by design, at least for the older siblings. With the story of LT leaving home and her father's attitude to that, I wonder if she felt that she wouldn't let her children go as easily, that she would fight harder to keep them? And somehow, seeing the siblings more as possessions, maybe she ended up finding that she couldn't let them go...that would mean breaking up her dream, it would feel like she was being abandoned. Feeling that way doesn't preclude the control (to the point of cruelty) aspect over the siblings, I think it works well with it.

Maybe it depends what sadism means in this context? I don't think they were being cruel for the sake of being cruel, I think the cruelty is derived from the need to control, and DT and LT just became more inured to what they were doing over time. I imagine someone in that situation telling the 'child', the 'victim' that "you brought this on yourself" and even convincing themselves that they aren't really responsible for what they're doing because they *have* to do it to get the desired effect of control.

In the 2013 vow renewal video there's an interesting look from LT to her eldest daughters when Elvis asks them to go up on stage together. It's not a look of hate or loathing, it's almost like she wants these girls to be her sisters in this fun event? How does that match with how she's treating them?

But neither do I feel they were overburdened as carers, I think they were overburdened as the jailers that they had developed into. They had too few 'prison guards' for the number of 'prisoners' they had, that was their burden, so they had to develop new tactics just like any jailer would have to in that situation, but I don't think the desire is sadism, I think it's control.

JMO.

Wow. Excellent, excellent post. Your hypotheses make sense of the contradictions of their treatment and how this case differs from many other torture child abuse cases.

I saw those looks too. So strange. It didnt seem to be acting either. Kind of a spontaneous smile. Also, the way she seemed to joke about the mix up with one child's name. And trying to dance with her older girls.

If her one of LT's sibling is right that they wanted to have a reality show, it further demonstrates that they might have sold themselves a story as to how all of this was ok.

A lot of this probably does have to do with fear of abandonment. And there is an aspect where I think they justified or normalized what they were doing.

But the food control seems to have an aspect of pleasure in it. I think they did derive pleasure from controlling their kids.

This kind of stuff is super complex. And probably has a variety of motives and developed over time. But I think the mother at least, got some kind of satisfaction from punishing them by withholding food. I think of how her sister described the weird ritual the oldest daughter had to go through to eat. And how she was always kept in her room. Control. Punishment.

It does all work together as you said. And as disgusting as this case is and as much anger as I feel toward these parents, who I feel are monsters, I want to know. What were all the factors that led to this. What was going on psychologically. What did they tell themselves. What did they tell their kids. How did they justify any of this. All of this. Did they ever think there would be an end to the on-going isolation and imprisonment?

One thing we do know, however, is that these parents, regardless of their own justifications or delusions of normalcy or solidarity with their kids, or whatever, they knew what they were doing was illegal because they rushed to unchain them when the cops were at the door.

 

[jessie]

@ Gitana - RSBM - One thing we do know, however, is that these parents, regardless of their own justifications or delusions of normalcy or solidarity with their kids, or whatever, they knew what they were doing was illegal because they rushed to unchain them when the cops were at the door.

Yes, and this is where excuses and explanations become irrelevant OIMO.
I must shut up and go back to lurking.

 

[Savmom]

She may not have known how to cook, and never learned. They instead, may have just grabbed takeout when they had no children, and then, when their children grew up off the bottle/breast, they just started giving them cans of Viennas. Cheap, easy, and, they are a meat product... It may not have always been Viennas for dinner either. Maybe they bought in bulk, and just got a pallet of whatever easy, canned food, was on sale at the time. Give everyone a can and call it a day.

That statement broke my heart. I cannot imagine giving my kids a can of any old thing & thinking that is enough for their nutritional requirements on a daily basis! Obviously that happens when life necessitates a quick meal of canned chili or ravioli cuz mom/dad are too sick or whatever to cook lol (BTDT). BUT there are numerous ways to use canned foods along with something healthy if you are on a strict budget (also BTDT).

I'm no gourmet chef but cooking healthy meals on a budget is not THAT difficult, especially with the advent of those newfangled things called cookbooks lol and they could get them cheap at thrift stores or free at library so no excuses there.

I am very curious to discover what the reasoning behind their starvation of the kids was. Not that there is ANY justifiable reason for starving your children but it will be interesting to see what excuse they come up with.

What a horrible, tragic, sad, (insert any of a multitude of depressing terms) completely avoidable situation, one of the many cases I've followed here at websleuths that will haunt my thoughts/dreams until I die :sick: :tears: :scream:

 

[gitana1]

@ Gitana - RSBM - One thing we do know, however, is that these parents, regardless of their own justifications or delusions of normalcy or solidarity with their kids, or whatever, they knew what they were doing was illegal because they rushed to unchain them when the cops were at the door.

Yes, and this is where excuses and explanations become irrelevant OIMO.
I must shut up and go back to lurking.

Yup. I'm not sure why you have to shut up and go back to lurking.

 

[Amonet]

They knew what they were doing was wrong, and part of the privacy aspect I think is the fear of being found out. I think they were putting on a purposeful charade for their extended families to pretend that all was good--better than good.

But we've also heard some stories of them interacting with neighbors, and also the eldest son going to some college classes. Those interactions might have been on the surface about wanting to appear more 'normal' but they must also have come with a deep paranoia when they went back behind closed doors.

In the first hearing for DT and LT I saw them glance at each other and it seemed to me a look that was saying, "well, we sorta knew it couldn't last forever...and this is it..."

 

[rsd1200]

I don't expect an answer, but what could have been in their minds about a future for these children?
Know I'm not alone in looking for reasons for this and doubt we'll ever understand, but if they found the children such an 'inconvenience' why not encourage (or frankly kick them out) when old enough, but no, just keep having more babies - and were the babies to fulfill some deep psychological need or to provide more victims?. Why starve, chain, imprison them? Nothing can ever excuse the torture.
Isn't this the difference between a sadistic mind against overburdened parents/carers?

I'm probably not making sense here as I'm rambling in so much built up anger and of course I'm absolutely in favour of the law and fair trials but IMOO here there is no defense, this couple are not worthy of the money spent on a trial - they are so obviously and absolutely guilty of these charges.

I read a true story about a Russian family, who had fled to the depths of Siberia, and survived, undetected, for 40 years. (They feared religious persecution) They fashioned a very crude, one room cabin, for all of them. The mother taught them to read and write as best she could, and they grew hemp to spin their own clothing. They'd not laid eyes on anyone, from the outside, for 40 years. Their eldest was nine, and youngest, two, when the fled. They didn't even know about WWII. The govt. workers, who accidentally found them, were floored that anyone could survive in the rugged conditions. They did live on the edge of starvation but were resilient.

Not b/c of religious persecution, but I have wondered, if for some reason, they feared for their children to go out into the world, alone. Even shackled, they were better off, than in that big, and scary, world. There's been 11 school shootings just this year, all you see on the nightly news is, murder, and more murder.

Were one or both a type of hoarder? I think so.If they'd never shackled the kids, and limited food intake, I still believe the home would have been foul. So that leaves the shackles and feeding issues. The shackles, I think, are based on the kids possibly trying go outside, to play (they did in TX), and the escape attempts. The feeding situation... I think it possibly fluctuated over time, and that it was in a peak down spiral,right now. I'm leaning toward it being LT being over the meals, as she was the stay-at-home parent, and that she may have a severe mental disability, and DT has failed to seek help for the situation.

Just a theory. One of couple three.

 

[gitana1]

I should go back to school for many many years. This is off topic....

I think I'm half answering my own question, but...

A person under the influence of Ambien doesn't have an intent to be unlawful and get behind the wheel. The inebriated/fugue state renders them unable to give consent for, say, sex, but doesn't give them a legal leg to stand on in a vehicular manslaughter case. But, as you point out in this case.... this is where I sort of answer my own question....that is where the different levels and kinds of charges come in. The DA in their interest of justice would *hopefully* pursue a reduced charge that takes everything into consideration. Without the checks and balances of the defense attorney, overinflated charges would stand too easily.

So, I think the moral of my story is I hope that they are afforded a righteous defense that puts them behind bars for as long as possible. No less than 29 years if I had my druthers. Ninety five has a nice ring to it though.

As far as society in general goes, and maintaining our American principles per te US constitution, it is imperative that everyone accused of a
crome be afforded a zealous defense.

But when I look at their ugly mugs and the innocent faces of their long suffering kids, I don't care. I'm less interested in American principles of due process and more interested in revenge. Not too logical, I know.

In any event, I went through their charges and any significant time will hinge on whether the torture charges stick.

Abuse of a dependent adult = up to four years state prison (as charged).

Child abuse/neglect = 1-6 years as charged.

False imprisonment = 16 months to 3 years as charged.

Torture = up to life imprisonment.

We absolutely need to the torture charge to stick. Otherwise, I do not see justice coming close to occurring.

So for that we need that the motive is extrotion, persuasion or sadistic pleasure.

Putting pies out of their reach but where they can see them would be a great way to prove sadistic pleasure. That's evidence. Even without clear statements indicating they were taunting them. Anything, like "Don't you dare touch this pie." Should be enough, IMO.

My wavering and worry comes from the cultural, historical sentiment that children are our property and we can do with them what we want.

There is also a historical, cultural attitude that harsh discipline of children is necessary.

Read the comments' sections of any article that has anythin remotely to do with kids committing crimes, talking back, being rude, or anything to do with any crimes and you will see countless comments about how "If that was me I wouldn't be alive to tell the tale." "When I was a kid I would have feared my parent more than the teacher" (who abused the child in the article in some way).

"We need to bring back corporal punishment. These people weren't disciplined as children. That's what caused them to kill. My parents used thebelt on me and I turned out fine."

Over and over you see these comments.

Put the two together and I'm worried a jury would find an excuse to give these people less time.

But the national outrage over this case gives me hope. Like even for those who believe kids should be harshly punished, this went over the line. I hope so.

They destroyed the lives of these kids. Some will never recover or reach the potential they could have due to intense isolation, abuse, control, etc.

To me justice would be spending the rest of their lives in prison.

 

[December]

I think this case will be hard to defend.

The "they just got overwhelmed" defense is no good because they continued to add to the family for 20 years after it was clear they were overwhelmed (assuming they had good intentions which I do not assume and require proof; I am not a mind reader and thus do not know what they thought.)

The "kids had blah blah blah disorder" is no good because there are too many kids and this went on for too many years. It is doubtful this many people, even in the same family, all have any "disorder" (except for maybe ones caused by malnutrition, confinement, lack of hygiene, and abuse... Uh oh, that is the prosecution's case, oops). But, it appears they did not seek medical help. So, why not? And, why did they let it continue on so long?

Anyway, I am sure defense will come up with something. But, mostly, I think they will attack prosecution's case and try to get evidence thrown out. JMO, ianal

 

[SaguaroSpirit]

I watched the Dr. Phil episode and these folks are beyond any diagnosis I could think of. The couple decided together to go to a hotel in Alabama to meet with a man the mother met online and they had sex while the husband watched....OK plenty of freaky deaky couples do this. Not my thing but whatever. The weird part was that the husband and wife went back exactly a year later to celebrate the anniversary of her sleeping with this internet man!!!!

Not to mention the wife's younger sister staying with them and the wife would pick the lock and let her husband watch the sister shower.....YUCK!!!!!

The YUCK factor is off the charts on this one. :facepalm:

 

[cady]

Their interactions with neighbors, at least those that we know about, were abrupt and paranoid about their privacy. Reportedly, when LT bought herself a slice of pizza, she was friendly enough for the clerk to know her name.....but the clerk knew nothing about the size of her family or its condition. JMO

 

[SkipperKey3]

I think this case will be hard to defend.

The "they just got overwhelmed" defense is no good because they continued to add to the family for 20 years after it was clear they were overwhelmed (assuming they had good intentions which I do not assume and require proof; I am not a mind reader and thus do not know what they thought.)

The "kids had blah blah blah disorder" is no good because there are too many kids and this went on for too many years. It is doubtful this many people, even in the same family, all have any "disorder" (except for maybe ones caused by malnutrition, confinement, lack of hygiene, and abuse... Uh oh, that is the prosecution's case, oops). But, it appears they did not seek medical help. So, why not? And, why did they let it continue on so long?

Anyway, I am sure defense will come up with something. But, mostly, I think they will attack prosecution's case and try to get evidence thrown out. JMO, ianal

I really don't think the "disorder" defense would work. Wouldn't they have to have some sort of medical or professional proof or documentation that such was the case? They apparently didn't take any of their kids regularly to the doctor.

EDIT: Besides, since they have been freed, the doctors have been checking them out, so such a disorder would have manifested itself.

 

[December]

I think the deputies' testimonies make this case somewhat unique.

They saw a young girl they thought was 10 and who told them she was 17. She showed them photo proof. They raided the house. They saw what the house looked like. They personally unchained the 22 year old son. The survivors told them they were starving. A lot of cases do not have third party witnesses like this.

I don't know if there are that many cases where everyone is removed from the house very quickly. And, the survivors were kept in the hospital for.. What was it? A week? That is a long time.

 

[gitana1]

Another thing is that in that 2013 vow renewal video, Elvis notices that LT and the three eldest girls are all wearing matching shoes, and LT looks so proud and happy. She apparently hasn't even observed that the girls can't walk in the shoes.

In other photos all the girls are not only wearing the same flip flops/sandals as each other, but LT is wearing the same ones. It's not just the whole family wearing matching clothes, it's right down to those sandals. I don't understand it and I'd be interested in learning the psychology behind it.

Me too. To me it seems that they suppressed every bit of individuality. They did not see these children as separate beings from themselves. And often abusers desire to abuse that in their children that they see and despise in themselves: in a sense, vulnerability, weakness, compassion, etc.

 

[December]

I really don't think the "disorder" defense would work. Wouldn't they have to have some sort of medical or professional proof or documentation that such was the case? They apparently didn't take any of their kids regularly to the doctor.

EDIT: Besides, since they have been freed, the doctors have been checking them out, so such a disorder would have manifested itself.

Yeah, I believe there would have to be prior proof of some kind. I left that out because I forgot. I didn't forget how they eschewed the doctor's office though. And, you're right, it wouldn't have magically have gone away upon rescue.

I don't think anything like that would work anyway.

 

[Amonet]

So for that we need that the notice is extrotion, persuasion or sadistic pleasure

Could you explain this a little more in layman's terms, please, Gitana?

Does the extortion have to be money, goods or services? Can it be related to behavior?

What does 'persuasion' mean in a legal sense? That seems to fit if it's to 'persuade' them to not run away, not tell relatives, neighbors or police of the true conditions in the home?

It's possible there's a sexual pleasure component in some of the torture, but if they torture the children and then go off to the bedroom together, how can you prove the sexual component? I really hope that the existing charge for lewd behavior is not the tip of the iceberg.

I'm only able to look at these terms from a lay perspective, and I have no idea what the details of these criteria are in law.

I would accept possibility of parole in 30 years for a minimum sentence. The sentence structure you've outlined for abuse etc sound ridiculous to me. There are people in prison for 25 years for pot, I consider what DT and LT have done to be far, far, worse than possession of pot, even with intent to supply.

 

[SkipperKey3]

I think the deputies' testimonies make this case somewhat unique.

They saw a young girl they thought was 10 and who told them she was 17. She showed them photo proof. They raided the house. They saw what the house looked like. They personally unchained the 22 year old son. The survivors told them they were starving. A lot of cases do not have third party witnesses like this.

I don't know if there are that many cases where everyone is removed from the house very quickly. And, the survivors were kept in the hospital for.. What was it? A week? That is a long time.

Right, and they will have all that medical documentation that indicates what their conditions were when they were removed as well - not to mention psychological evaluations.

 

[human]

The oldest girl went to school until third grade. That is old enough to be diagnosed with any issues with cognition, behavior, learning, physical, social, emotional. Is there any documentation that there were issues?

I wonder why the oldest went to school and the others did not? Was it too hard to get the kids up, dressed, fed and off to school? What inspired that decision?It seems like getting rid of lots of kids for hours of the day would be nice. Perhaps they were required to be home to provide childcare?

Where did they learn this method of childcare? If DT and LT had loving care growing up would they think this was all right? They seemed to have treated their ownselves nicely with meals in restaurants including Applebee’s, trips, cars, and specialized license plates. They knew how to be nice to their ownselves

What do you suppose the marching around for hours was about?

 

[gitana1]

I really don't think the "disorder" defense would work. Wouldn't they have to have some sort of medical or professional proof or documentation that such was the case? They apparently didn't take any of their kids regularly to the doctor.

EDIT: Besides, since they have been freed, the doctors have been checking them out, so such a disorder would have manifested itself.

It has to do with state of mind though. There is no such thing as a disorder defense. But the question the defense would pose is were they confining them and depriving them of food not because they enjoyed it but because they thought they had a disorder.

But I'm betting there's a ton of evidence that they were punishing them through food and chains and took sadistic pleasure in it. I really feel this case wasn't close to being overcharged.