CA - Joshua Tree parents arrested for keeping kids in a box for 4 years, Mar 2018 *Charges Dropped*

DNA Solves
DNA Solves
DNA Solves

New Posts

flourish said:
There is a lot of room between a plywood box and a mansion. Seriously people, the police thought there was enough evidence and they've been charged with child cruelty. So maybe we don't know the entirety of the situation, but the police who WERE there thought it rose to a level of being dangerous.

I'm appalled this is being defended! Living simply doesn't involve piles of feces.
Click to expand...

Well said I wholeheartedly agree with you and respectfully totally disagree with Trident however we are all entitled to our views even if some are shocking views
MOO


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
I have seen all the pictures and watched the video. These people were not doing their best for their children. That place was a complete mess, with human feces everywhere, NOT in a dugout latrine - but strewn everywhere. The family's possessions were also strewn everywhere. There was no attempt to keep their possessions in a neat, clean and tidy manner or in any one particular place. It is obvious the family was homeless, but if they were living temporarily in the plywood box, while they were attempting to construct a home for themselves, they would have and could have lived in a cleaner and more tidy manner. This would have indicated to LE that they WERE TRYING to do the best that they possibly could. This is not what what happening, as the attending LE would have read into the situation. It was obvious that these people had mental health issues, and their children had suffered enough.
AS has been mentioned a few times already the Government has services that could have and should have been utilized.
 
http://www.latimes.com/local/lanow/la-me-ln-joshua-tree-couple-20180302-story.html#nt=tertiarynavbar

Another perspective. It sounds like in this case (according to someone who knew them) the children were loved and were being educated (utilized the library, etc).

I am not defending them - I'm just wondering if people would be more sympathetic to the possibility that this is indeed a poverty-stricken but loving family had this not come on the heels of the House of Horrors.

I come from stock of a family who would have rather died than accept welfare - very hard-working immigrants who genuinely believed that if you didn't work, you shouldn't eat. When my grandfather was in a nursing home and all their money ran out, the family didn't have the heart to tell him that his stay there was being subsidized by govt funding - it would have been devastating and he would have insisted he could not stay there.

Right or wrong, this perspective from friends was that they wanted to find a way to manage on their own without accepting help from anyone.

I want to hear the parents' side of this.
 
I will wait until more information comes out to judge. However it certainly sounds like they could have done more to make the area sanitary.

I wonder why they were not building their own house on the property if they owned it? Certainly they were able to one the prairie, all 5 family members here could have assisted. That's what I would have been doing, maybe it wasn't possible.
 
webaddict said:
http://www.latimes.com/local/lanow/la-me-ln-joshua-tree-couple-20180302-story.html#nt=tertiarynavbar

Another perspective. It sounds like in this case (according to someone who knew them) the children were loved and were being educated (utilized the library, etc).

I am not defending them - I'm just wondering if people would be more sympathetic to the possibility that this is indeed a poverty-stricken but loving family had this not come on the heels of the House of Horrors. I noticed too that it spoke of feces in holes - so it sounds like they were trying to use simple latrines.

I come from stock of a family who would have rather died than accept welfare - very hard-working immigrants who genuinely believed that if you didn't work, you shouldn't eat. When my grandfather was in a nursing home and all their money ran out, the family didn't have the heart to tell him that his stay there was being subsidized by govt funding - it would have been devastating and he would have insisted he could not stay there.

Right or wrong, this perspective from friends was that they wanted to find a way to manage on their own without accepting help from anyone.

I want to hear the parents' side of this.
Click to expand...

200 square feet. That is tiny house size. Could have been a little taller certainly, but that alone isn't cruel.
 
When people cannot handle their own affairs and provide for their children, the govt gets to step in.

Living in a garbage dump is horrifying when I see it in other countries, To say it is a lifestyle choice is absurd. It may be their lifestyle choice, but fortunately we have laws to intervene in lifestyle choice. For example, some people have the lifestyle choice of having scores of cats and dogs that they cannot take care of.

The public,becomes outraged about animals living in filth.This “home”for the children is not suitable for human habitation. It is not suitable for cat habitation.

I weep that the children have to grow up like this.

I really cannot believe that one person on here would live in that. Yet because they are poor, it is ok?
 
human said:
When people cannot handle their own affairs and provide for their children, the govt gets to step in.

Living in a garbage dump is horrifying when I see it in other countries, To say it is a lifestyle choice is absurd.

They are poor, it is ok?
Click to expand...

I wouldn't call it a lifestyle "choice." And yes, I agree, it is NOT "ok." - I agree totally....it is very sad, and my guess is that it is happening all across the affluent country of America (affluent compared to most of the rest of the world).

I want to hear from the kids and the parents. I grew up in a nice house with all outward appearances that things were OK -they were not OK...nobody suspected what happened in that nice house and nobody cared. Clean, nice surroundings sadly don't always indicate a loving, nurturing environment for children.
 
I’m glad to hear from the L.A. Times article that the children were receiving an education and had outlets like scouts. That’s commendable. It seems that they didn’t stay there at that property all the time. As I said before, I hope this can be sorted out so the kids can be returned to their parents under better conditions.

For those in the comment section of that article who are insisting that “poverty is not illegal,” the parents weren’t arrested for being poor. Poor homeless people have many rights, at least in my town in Oregon. But LE came to the property thinking it was abandoned and found the three children living in very unsanitary conditions. Based on what their father started to say in court, he probably did not understand why the officers were concerned. So the officers had to act to protect the children and in the process, the parents were arrested. Not because they were poor, but because they were not providing safe living conditions for their children.

If the parents are cooperative and willing to swallow their pride and accept the help available for the sake of their kids, I expect and hope that the charges will be dropped.

Additionally, I think it’s interesting that people are quick to pile on LE and Child Protective Services when children fall through the cracks of neglect and abuse, but at the same time they are piling on LE for doing their job and attempting to protect children from neglect. Double standard much?
 
Blondie in Spokane said:
attachment.php
attachment.php


Parents Daniel Panico & Mona Kirk

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...ifornia-family-lived-filthy-desert-shack.html
Click to expand...

He is certainly an old looking 73. My husband looks much younger than his 73 years, so I can’t compare. But based on older ones I know, Daniel Panico looks at least 80 to me. I wonder about his health, physical and mental.
 
I can't believe there are people defending this. Being poor is not illegal no living in filth, neglecting your children's medical , emotional, and educational needs absolutely is as it should be. As others have pointed out there are programs to help with food bills shelter. It's not about you and your pride when you choose to have children. There are programs to provide free insurance for the kids and free rides to DRs appts. lots of options available. But apparently they were too lazy to apply to any of it. You can see the garbage from space. I can't imagine what kind of wild animals could be lurking in that mess. Had one of these kids got bitten by a poisonous snake or spider the parents would've been responsible IMO for allowing the environment to be that way. Poor is not an excuse for this. Pine Sol and a broom are cheap. No one should ever live surrounded with feces and trash

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G891A using Tapatalk
 
MsFacetious said:
200 square feet. That is tiny house size. Could have been a little taller certainly, but that alone isn't cruel.
Click to expand...

200 square feet is really not reasonable for 5 people, and absolutely unacceptable when the structure is only FOUR FEET TALL, not to mention the issue of no running water.

Combine the lack of running water with the feces strewn about and that's a serious hygiene issue that has potentially serious health risks attached.
 
webaddict said:
I wouldn't call it a lifestyle "choice." And no, it is NOT "ok." - I agree totally....it is very sad, and my guess is that it is happening all across the affluent country of America (affluent compared to most of the rest of the world).

I want to hear from the kids and the parents. I grew up in a nice house with all outward appearances that things were OK -they were not OK...nobody suspected what happened in that nice house and nobody cared. Clean, nice surroundings sadly don't always indicate a loving, nurturing environment for children.
Click to expand...
BBM

I certainly agree that living conditions don’t necessarily indicate “the rest of the story.” My mother grew up in wealth with servants and was treated terribly. There are plenty of poor, happy families without electricity who haul water. It sounds as if these kids were raised with more intellectual advantages than many, are loved and may be quite happy.

The “lifestyle choice” is the unsanitary disease-causing mess, not the poverty. Anyone can make an effort to keep their surroundings as clean as their circumstances allow. I know we agree that feces and garbage either scattered or in open holes is a choice and is neither acceptable or legal. And yes, it is going on across this country, sadly. Usually we hear about it in connection with drug use, but that doesn’t appear to be the case with this family.
 
Lilibet said:
I It seems that they didn’t stay there at that property all the time. As I said before, I hope this can be sorted out so the kids can be returned to their parents under better conditions.

Based on what their father started to say in court, he probably did not understand why the officers were concerned. So the officers had to act to protect the children and in the process, the parents were arrested. Not because they were poor, but because they were not providing safe living conditions for their children.

If the parents are cooperative and willing to swallow their pride and accept the help available for the sake of their kids, I expect and hope that the charges will be dropped.

Additionally, I think it’s interesting that people are quick to pile on LE and Child Protective Services when children fall through the cracks of neglect and abuse, but at the same time they are piling on LE for doing their job and attempting to protect children from neglect. Double standard much?
Click to expand...

Yes! I am so thankful there was intervention for these kids, and I really hope that there can be mental health services for the father if that is what is needed...some guidance for this family (including insistence that they agree to accept help) and that they end up living together in a situation that is healthy for all concerned. I hope it has a better ending than throwing the parents into jail (unless of course it comes out that there is criminal activity requiring prison time) and that this family gets help they need.
 
Lilibet said:
I expect at least that of humans in any country.
Click to expand...

It seems that leaving faeces on the ground in that sort of climate is actually OK from a health point of view because the UV from the sun kills off pretty much any and all bacteria and viruses. Archeologists believe that the Essenes died from disease after they rejected crapping in the desert like the Bedouin do and created a specific toilet area near their community where they buried their faeces. Because they used the same area repeatedly for toileting they exposed themselves to the bacteria and viruses which proliferated instead of being neutralised.

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/w...-killed-off-dead-sea-scrolls-sect-424344.html
 
Lilibet said:
He is certainly an old looking 73. My husband looks much younger than his 73 years, so I can’t compare. But based on older ones I know, Daniel Panico looks at least 80 to me. I wonder about his health, physical and mental.
Click to expand...

He looks pretty frail to me.
 
I doubt that the parents were doing any kind of illegal activities because they wouldn't be so broke if they were dealing or selling illegal weapons or trafficking etc.

And hearing that the kids were taking part in scouts and going to the library and such makes me feel a little better about the situation.

I think the biggest problem may be the 40 cats running around. But that might not have been their fault. They may have just began feeding a few stray cats and suddenly there are 30 more running about.


The silver lining in all of this is that they will hopefully get some needed services and improve their circumstances.

I hope they just get some kind of probation and a chance to take classes etc, instead of jail time if there was really no physical or mental abuse and if the family was educating them and trying to raise them with love---even if they appear to be doing so with great deficits at this time.
 
There's a lot of UV exposure inside the home, then? And even if, hypothetically, all the feces is outside, it swarms with bacteria and other illness-causing microbes until the UV kills it, however long that takes. It isn't instantaneous.

MelmothTheLost said:
It seems that leaving faeces on the ground in that sort of climate is actually OK from a health point of view because the UV from the sun kills off pretty much any and all bacteria and viruses. Archeologists believe that the Essenes died from disease after they rejected crapping in the desert like the Bedouin do and created a specific toilet area near their community where they buried their faeces. Because they used the same area repeatedly for toileting they exposed themselves to the bacteria and viruses which proliferated instead of being neutralised.

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/w...-killed-off-dead-sea-scrolls-sect-424344.html
Click to expand...
 
katydid23 said:
I doubt that the parents were doing any kind of illegal activities because they wouldn't be so broke if they were dealing or selling illegal weapons or trafficking etc.

And hearing that the kids were taking part in scouts and going to the library and such makes me feel a little better about the situation.

I think the biggest problem may be the 40 cats running around. But that might not have been their fault. They may have just began feeding a few stray cats and suddenly there are 30 more running about.


The silver lining in all of this is that they will hopefully get some needed services and improve their circumstances.

I hope they just get some kind of probation and a chance to take classes etc, instead of jail time if there was really no physical or mental abuse and if the family was educating them and trying to raise them with love---even if they appear to be doing so with great deficits at this time.
Click to expand...

The threat of jail time may force them to accept help. There is no way that those chidren will be released to go back to those circumstances.

I reiterate. I do not believe for one instant that anyone on here would go live in that hell hole.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

DNASolves

Who is Escambia County John Doe (1989)?

Members online

... and 130 more.
Total: 2,760 (members: 131, guests: 2,629)

Online statistics

Members online
131
Guests online
2,629
Total visitors
2,760
Totals may include hidden visitors.

Forum statistics

Threads
600,795
Messages
18,113,812
Members
230,990
Latest member
DeeKay
Back
Top