Anonymous wrote:

I suppose the same is true for the national media. The coverage was minimal, the abuse facts were white washed if reported at all, and they were very outspoken that foul play was not suspected even when it made no sense to say so.

????????

There's been plenty of coverage in the media I use.

They had lived in three different states in the past 6 years. Maybe communication between authorities gets lost across state borders?

Also it seems from the timeline I saw that CPS came to their door in Washington for the 1st time on Friday, March 23rd. The family was home but did not answer the door. Shortly after CPS left, all 8 of them left in the van and that is the last time they were seen. They went off a cliff a 10-11 hour drive south of their home. So far no info on whether they drove straight there and off the cliff or when the deaths happened.

On Monday, March 26th, CPS returned to the home but there was no answer. On the same day, the van was spotted by a man stopped at the pull out on the highway who was walking along the cliff edge and saw the van below. He called 9-1-1.

CPS returned to the house on March 27th. By then the family was long dead but I assume CPS didn't know.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I was searching for days on this topic in the dcum forum. Was wondering what took so long to start one.

I can't believe those kids were not removed after the one mom plead guilty to child abuse.

It would not surprise me if these moms had mental health issues and were on antipsychotics.

I think this one creates dissonance for this board. This was a left leaning family, lesbians, mixed race, adoptive parents. Doesn't fit the narrative of who many people want to see as child abusers.

I suppose the same is true for the national media. The coverage was minimal, the abuse facts were white washed if reported at all, and they were very outspoken that foul play was not suspected even when it made no sense to say so.

Or instead of interpreting it as the media not wanting to tarnish the image of a lesbian couple, we could view it as the media/police not valuing the lives of black and always white washing crimes by whites in general, like the poor, challenged white young man in the Texas shooting. This isn't about protecting lesbians, it's about law enforcement always giving the benefit of the doubt to whites who commit crimes, especially crimes against minorities, as in this case and in Texas.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I was searching for days on this topic in the dcum forum. Was wondering what took so long to start one.

I can't believe those kids were not removed after the one mom plead guilty to child abuse.

It would not surprise me if these moms had mental health issues and were on antipsychotics.

I think this one creates dissonance for this board. This was a left leaning family, lesbians, mixed race, adoptive parents. Doesn't fit the narrative of who many people want to see as child abusers.

I suppose the same is true for the national media. The coverage was minimal, the abuse facts were white washed if reported at all, and they were very outspoken that foul play was not suspected even when it made no sense to say so.

Are you reading the same media I am?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I was searching for days on this topic in the dcum forum. Was wondering what took so long to start one.

I can't believe those kids were not removed after the one mom plead guilty to child abuse.

It would not surprise me if these moms had mental health issues and were on antipsychotics.

I think this one creates dissonance for this board. This was a left leaning family, lesbians, mixed race, adoptive parents. Doesn't fit the narrative of who many people want to see as child abusers.

I suppose the same is true for the national media. The coverage was minimal, the abuse facts were white washed if reported at all, and they were very outspoken that foul play was not suspected even when it made no sense to say so.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Every time I see a large family (especially with teenagers) in those matchy matchy tee shirt pictures, I am going to get creeped out and wonder WTH is going on behind closed doors.

These women were using these children as props to make themselves look grand and then not taking care of them, isolating them and outright abusing them at home. If those women had wanted to die like that, why couldn't they have let the children live?

They didn't want the kids to talk and tell what really happened in the home. They worked so hard to build the happy awesome family image, they couldn't handle that crumbling.

They didn't want to be held accountable for abusing their children and they didn't want the world to know what lying monsters they were, so they killed 6 innocent children in order to prevent the truth from coming out. They killed those kids to preserve their own public images.

Those poor kids, what kind of a life that must have been for them. And all the warning signs. The authorities knew, neighbors reported them and nothing was done.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I was searching for days on this topic in the dcum forum. Was wondering what took so long to start one.

I can't believe those kids were not removed after the one mom plead guilty to child abuse.

It would not surprise me if these moms had mental health issues and were on antipsychotics.

I think this one creates dissonance for this board. This was a left leaning family, lesbians, mixed race, adoptive parents. Doesn't fit the narrative of who many people want to see as child abusers.

I think I knew this, but I figured there had to at least one person who is outraged enough to start a thread. Besides, this is such a severe case. I would hope justice for the 6 kids would outweigh lesbian rights, etc. Also, the hypocrisy of the women with their public support for BLM when clearly they were hypocrites and anything but supporters.

Anonymous wrote:Every time I see a large family (especially with teenagers) in those matchy matchy tee shirt pictures, I am going to get creeped out and wonder WTH is going on behind closed doors.

These women were using these children as props to make themselves look grand and then not taking care of them, isolating them and outright abusing them at home. If those women had wanted to die like that, why couldn't they have let the children live?

They didn't want the kids to talk and tell what really happened in the home. They worked so hard to build the happy awesome family image, they couldn't handle that crumbling.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The kids all look small for their age as well. They are short for being 14-19 mostly (I think one girl was 12).

No one was 19 in that photo. It was taken in 2014. Yes, they were still small, but tweens/teenagers change a lot in 4 years. Some would have been under 10 in that photo.

I can't find any pics where they look like a family of teens. I found one from 2016 and they didn't look much older than the pic with the blue shirts.

What is it with people who abuse their kids and dressing them all in matching clothes? Is it to take away their individuality?

Also similar to Turpins it seems these kids had no social media presence and were not online. Yet parents were.

Yes. I think you hit the nail on the head. Sickening.

Anonymous wrote:I was searching for days on this topic in the dcum forum. Was wondering what took so long to start one.

I can't believe those kids were not removed after the one mom plead guilty to child abuse.

It would not surprise me if these moms had mental health issues and were on antipsychotics.

I think this one creates dissonance for this board. This was a left leaning family, lesbians, mixed race, adoptive parents. Doesn't fit the narrative of who many people want to see as child abusers.

Every time I see a large family (especially with teenagers) in those matchy matchy tee shirt pictures, I am going to get creeped out and wonder WTH is going on behind closed doors.

These women were using these children as props to make themselves look grand and then not taking care of them, isolating them and outright abusing them at home. If those women had wanted to die like that, why couldn't they have let the children live?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The kids all look small for their age as well. They are short for being 14-19 mostly (I think one girl was 12).

No one was 19 in that photo. It was taken in 2014. Yes, they were still small, but tweens/teenagers change a lot in 4 years. Some would have been under 10 in that photo.

I can't find any pics where they look like a family of teens. I found one from 2016 and they didn't look much older than the pic with the blue shirts.

What is it with people who abuse their kids and dressing them all in matching clothes? Is it to take away their individuality?

Also similar to Turpins it seems these kids had no social media presence and were not online. Yet parents were.

I was searching for days on this topic in the dcum forum. Was wondering what took so long to start one.

I can't believe those kids were not removed after the one mom plead guilty to child abuse.

It would not surprise me if these moms had mental health issues and were on antipsychotics.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:When you look at that picture with the cop and the Youtube video, that boy is in SO much anguish and pain. Why? This is hauntingly sad.

+1
I think that photo tells something other than what the media reported. It now seems likely the child was looking for protection from the 2 so called moms. The child appears to be attempting to cry out for help for himself and siblings. the moms were at a BLM march but those adoptive moms clearly did not care for the black lives she adopted and was supposed to care for. Instead the moms repeatedly abused and murdered those young innocent lives. The moms were living a lie.

P.s. moms failed kids allowing them the ride in the car without seatbelts.

And one of the moms in particular looks like she was eating very well on the welfare that should have gone to the kids.

Both of them . Gross.

Anonymous wrote:The kids all look small for their age as well. They are short for being 14-19 mostly (I think one girl was 12).

No one was 19 in that photo. It was taken in 2014. Yes, they were still small, but tweens/teenagers change a lot in 4 years. Some would have been under 10 in that photo.