• Quick note - the problem with Youtube videos not embedding on the forum appears to have been fixed, thanks to ZiprHead. If you do still see problems let me know.

13 victims, ages 2 to 29, kept shackled by parents

Bob001 said:
This story says California authorities are comparing notes with authorities in Texas, where they lived previously. It wouldn't be a surprise if there are some Texas charges, too.
http://www.latimes.com/local/lanow/la-me-perris-couple-children-endangered-20180118-story.html
Click to expand...

There's an article floating around that I saw yesterday which has photographs of the interiors of two houses the family had occupied in Texas, taken by the eventual buyers. In one, the house is cleared of belongings but the walls and carpets are shown to be in a filthy and thoroughly disgusting state. In the other, the home is still filled with some hoarder-type clutter and there are several features that stood out to the buyer as particularly odd, such as inexplicably-damaged bedroom closet doors, and screwed wood panels installed over and blocking the air vents.
 
Think the emergency number thing is law everywhere.

Was on QI a while ago as an interesting fact that in the US 911 is called the most on Xmas day, as every idiot is doing it to try their new phones without connections or SIM cards

Pretty funny really

Unless your the person actually dying and can't get through
 
ddt said:
That's interesting. If I may go out on a guess, the mother's parents and/or sister(s) care enough for her that they ponied up for the lawyer, in the hope to offload as much as possible of the guilt to the father. That also opens up the possibility for the prosecutors to play them against each other.

FWIW, I don't think there's any excuse, save severe mental impairment, for either of the parents to absolve of guilt.
Click to expand...

That's why they get a trial in a court of law. It's supposed to prevent lynch mobs and trials by emotion.
 
John Jones said:
That's why they get a trial in a court of law. It's supposed to prevent lynch mobs and trials by emotion.
Click to expand...
OK, point taken. That was poorly phrased. I'll rephrase.

If the charges made are proven without reasonable doubt, I can't see how you can convict one parent and the other not. There's no way one is responsible for ongoing malnutrition, locking up and torture and the other not.

Can you agree with that statement?
 
Last edited:
ddt said:
OK, point taken. That was poorly phrased. I'll rephrase.

If the charges made are proven without reasonable doubt, I can't see how you can convict one parent and the other not. There's no way one is responsible for ongoing malnutrition, locking up and torture and the other not.

Can you agree with that statement?
Click to expand...

I absolutely can.

If you're going to predict that one parent will be held 'more responsible' than the other, I can agree with that prediction also.
 
ddt said:
If the charges made are proven without reasonable doubt, I can't see how you can convict one parent and the other not. There's no way one is responsible for ongoing malnutrition, locking up and torture and the other not.
Click to expand...
Yeah, both parents have the exact same charges against them, other than that he has the extra lewd act charge. Prosecutors apparently regard them both as equally responsible. There's no indication of who was doing the punishing and abusing or if it was both. We are told that she was a housewife staying at home and he worked as an engineer in aerospace and defense.
 
Bob001 said:
EDITED TO ADD: But this story does say she has a private attorney, but it doesn't say whether he might have been court-appointed. Defense will be very expensive if they have to pay for it themselves.
https://www.cbsnews.com/news/califo...-court-in-captivity-case-live-stream-updates/
Click to expand...

I don't see that article mention she has a private attorney, actually. But this Daily Fail article does:
The couple are being represented separately: David by David Macher of the Public Defender's Office and Louise by Jeff Moore of local law firm Blumenthal Law Office's.
Click to expand...
That does not say who pays for Moore. Is it customary that the court appoints a private attorney when there's a public defender's office?

The family, apparently, also had two puppies that were not malnourished.
 
It's a source for factual information and photos not found in any other media and it's called the DailyFail.
 
Checkmite said:
There's an article floating around that I saw yesterday which has photographs of the interiors of two houses the family had occupied in Texas, taken by the eventual buyers. In one, the house is cleared of belongings but the walls and carpets are shown to be in a filthy and thoroughly disgusting state. In the other, the home is still filled with some hoarder-type clutter and there are several features that stood out to the buyer as particularly odd, such as inexplicably-damaged bedroom closet doors, and screwed wood panels installed over and blocking the air vents.
Click to expand...

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-5279989/Horror-Texas-homes-Turpin-couple-used-live.html

To be fair, judging from the recent closet photo taken by the new owner, it appears that the new owner also shares a penchant for child enslavement and torture.
 
William Parcher said:
Hundreds of DVDs in the house. Many or most seem to be children's themes. This suggests that they have a TV and/or computer. Some photos here also showing board games.
Click to expand...

Again supporting the notion that the couple did not deprive themselves, just their children. The articles also state that while the children say none of them were ever given any toys to own, investigators found a wealth of toys in the house, all still in their unopened packages. These along with the supposed trips to theme parks and Vegas definitely proof that the squalor and famine the children were forced to live in wasn't a result of financial difficulty. They could have afforded to give the children a normal life and keep them well-fed and healthy. It was a deliberate choice not to.

It almost sounds like the couple was living a sort of private double-life, where they surrounded themselves with these trappings of a large, happy and normal family that they would drag out once in a while for photographs and indulgence, but otherwise kept packed up and stored away when "not in use", children included.
 
William Parcher said:
More newly-published family group photos and a story about the mother's past.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-5289527/David-Louise-Turpin-eloped-16.html


Hundreds of DVDs in the house. Many or most seem to be children's themes. This suggests that they have a TV and/or computer. Some photos here also showing board games.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-5289371/Extensive-DVD-collection-house-horrors-family.html
Click to expand...

My God, man! DVD's! Alphabetized! The complete box set of Everybody Loves Raymond !! How can you say these children were not being tortured?*


*Seriously, why does the Daily Fail find this relevant? Were they expecting Blu-ray™ Discs. Everything converted to .mkv with Handbrake and put onto a dedicated HDD or Flash Drive?
 
Checkmite said:
Again supporting the notion that the couple did not deprive themselves, just their children.
Click to expand...
Did you look at the titles? Hundreds of kids movies. And you are claiming that the parents only ever indulged themselves? I'm a skeptic.
 
William Parcher said:
Did you look at the titles? Hundreds of kids movies. And you are claiming that the parents only ever indulged themselves? I'm a skeptic.
Click to expand...

I saw a few kids movies; hardly hundreds. In fact it seemed to me that children's movies didn't even comprise the bulk of the collection, just to tell from the few photographs provided.

There's nothing wrong with being skeptical.

My own approach is that, no matter what you may think you see in them, a handful of group still photographs taken two or three years ago or even more do not provide sufficiently-compelling evidence to suspect the local police of lying or exaggerating in their report about the nauseating condition of the home and the children when they entered the residence a couple of days ago. If nothing else, the fact that the children are still in the hospital recovering as of the latest reports, supports the contention that they were in bad shape.
 
Last edited:
William Parcher said:
Yeah, both parents have the exact same charges against them, other than that he has the extra lewd act charge. Prosecutors apparently regard them both as equally responsible. There's no indication of who was doing the punishing and abusing or if it was both. We are told that she was a housewife staying at home and he worked as an engineer in aerospace and defense.
Click to expand...
I think you miss the point I'm trying to make, so let me try again.

There's no way to convict one parent and acquit the other.

The "lewd act" the father is accused of, but the mother not, is a contrast to what I'm arguing. That's indeed something that the mother didn't do and that can have escaped her attention.

But the torture through malnourishment, locking them up, depriving them of anything resembling education, and shackling for days on end, is an ongoing 24/7 process that must have been carried out by both parents. There's no way that has only been carried out by one parent without the other knowing and thus participating. Both parents are responsible for raising their kids.

So if that all is established as fact, both parents must be guilty. At most, the attorney of one of them can try to argue that the other set it up and that their client should receive some leniency in the sentencing.
 
John Jones said:
I absolutely can.

If you're going to predict that one parent will be held 'more responsible' than the other, I can agree with that prediction also.
Click to expand...
Yes, I'm going to predict that. And that will be the main function of them having separate attorneys, so that they can try to shift the blame to each other.
 
ddt said:
But the torture through malnourishment, locking them up, depriving them of anything resembling education, and shackling for days on end, is an ongoing 24/7 process that must have been carried out by both parents. There's no way that has only been carried out by one parent without the other knowing and thus participating. Both parents are responsible for raising their kids.
Click to expand...

It's quite comical to think that if the charges are true as given, only one of the parents could be responsible and the other may have been completely oblivious.

"Darling, have you seen any of our thirteen kids lately? I can't remember seeing them since that Vegas trip two years ago."

"'Kids'? I don't know what you mean, dear. We don't have any kids."

"Oh my, silly me. But what is that awful stench that is permeating our house? And what is that metallic clinking sound I keep hearing coming from the bedrooms?"

"That's just the neighbor's dog."

"Yes you're probably right. I love you, shnookums."
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom