Wednesday, December 8, 2010

Roloff Family Sue Washington County for $200,000 for Trespassing Incident

The Portland Business Journal is reporting that the Roloffs are suing Washington County for $200,000 stemming from the incident that viewers saw depicted on an epiosode of Little People, Big World

The lawsuit claims that Amy Roloff suffered severe distress after confronting an intruder who trespassed on the couple’s property, identified in court documents as John Wheeler, a Washington County building services inspector.

From the: Portland Business Journal - by Wendy Culverwell
Date: Wednesday, December 8, 2010, 10:43am PST :

http://www.bizjournals.com/portland/news/2010/12/08/little-people-stars-sue-washington-co.html


"Amy Roloff, who was home at the time, observed Wheeler on the property. She confronted him and asked for his identity and a disposable camera he was using to snap photos. According to the suit, Wheeler refused to identify himself or to turn over the camera. He retreated to his county work vehicle with Amy Roloff in pursuit as she called 911 for emergency assistance.

Amy Roloff noticed the county logo on Wheeler’s truck door and climbed in to identify Wheeler. The suit contends Wheeler “came into physical contact with plaintiff Amy Roloff and was pushing her off the seat and out of the truck”. He provided his business card before driving off.

The suit said the Roloffs have a heightened sensitivity to intruders because the “substantial celebrity” brought on by their television program. The case noted previous encounters with people who have threatened to harm them and their daughter and disclosed that burglars have successfully entered the family home in the past.

The couple asked that the case be tried before a jury.

The Roloffs are represented by Portland law firm Schwabe, Williamson & Wyatt P.C. Chris Gilmore, an attorney for Washington County, is representing the county. He could not be immediately reached to comment on the case. John Wheeler and his supervisor, Jay Winchester, are named as co-defendants."

Read the full article here:

http://www.bizjournals.com/portland/news/2010/12/08/little-people-stars-sue-washington-co.html

You can see a statement from Washington County on the matter (before the lawsuit was filed):

http://spiritswander.blogspot.com/2010/11/washington-county-department-of-land.html

59 comments:

Greg said...

Not surprised the Roloffs are the lawsuit type.

What a joke! "Wheeler came into physical contact with Amy Roloff"......yeah, because she climbed on his lap!

Carol said...

Oh brother! I've always been annoyed by people that sue over "emotional distress". Thanks for wasting tax payers dollars for their own greed.

The show is ending so they have their hands out for more free money. Just my opinion.

Susan said...

I've lost any respect for Amy that I've ever had. It shows her greed.

I wonder if the inspector will file a counter-lawsuit?

Anonymous said...

They're looking for a settlement offer.

Brandon said...

I hope they get nothing.

That's so Christians of Amy! They apologize for the inspector being rude.

The Roloffs are just being the bloodsuckers that many people thought they were all along.

Is there any confirming the threats and thefts? That doesn't have anything to do with the inspector anyway.

I'd like to know exactly what the "threats" were about Molly? Knowing how the Roloffs exagerrate things I'd like to know what that really was. Was it someone calling Molly a brat? (out of all the kids to say something about...Molly???)

David said...

The Roloffs are throwing a bunch of different issues together.

Suing for emotional distress is common, but weak. Amy was so severely distressed that she continued giving motivational speeches!

And if Molly was being threatened, perhaps the Roloffs should re-thinking allowing strangers to wander around their property?

Rap541 said...

Or accepting money from strangers to give personal tours?

How threatened can they feel if they're still accepting three hundred dollars from any random stranger for an indepth personal tour of the property?

Chris said...

What a great motivational speaker Amy must be. ROFL!

She gets emotionally distressed because a guy with a vehicle that says "Washington County Land Use and Transportation" was inspecting the Ark.

I think Amy is need to a motivational speaker.

She's no better than Matt. Tsk tsk, Amy.

abstractdaisy said...

"What a great motivational speaker Amy must be"...

Maybe to motivate you to sue whenever you feel slighted or discriminated against regardless of whether it's founded or not. You know the saying: throw enough crap at the wall and see what sticks. She's a poor excuse for any motivation or example for turning the other cheek--but not a surprised to see this lawsuit from the Roloffs--not the first, certainly won't be the last. I am surprised, however, that it took this long. Puzzling isn't it that Amy certainly wasn't distressed enough to not go on her cruise; handle her charity golf outing or galavant around town and the country on TLC's dime. Must be the bank accounts low.

A1 said...

Roloffs will do anything to make money.

barnaby said...

It's all about money. Maybe those fights about Matt's spending were less staged than we thought. After all, the gravy train ended months ago and anything beats working a real 9-5 job!

Russell said...

The Roloffs are bottom of the barrell slime. This proves it.

While other people are honest and hard working and care about things like morals, values and doing the right thing, the Roloffs are always looking for a quick sleazeball away to get rich.

I think Jesus would be disgusted at how the Roloffs conduct their lives.

Expressed said...

Rolls eyes.

They were in no danger, the man clearly didn't look like a threat to anyone. It was clear he was from the county taking pics of the ark.

The stuff about him coming into physical contact with Amy is laughable. It's kinda hard to avoid physical contact with some one when they climb into the driver seat of your truck and sit on your lap.

Mike P. said...

Emotional distress, and that's all?

Didn't Yosemite Sam Roloff huff and puff about all the "rights" the inspector violated?

Hmmmm. Guess the cop was right, huh? The inspector was legally on the property; no lawsuits there.

I do agree that he should have stated his business, but it was Amy who hyperventilated over it, jacked it up into a big event, chewed the scenery.

Clearly, all that acting is worth $200,000 of taxpayers' money. I think the Roloffs believe their own editing.

I hope the county defense subpoenas ALL the video of the incident. That might make some interesting viewing for the jury.

NJC said...

Poor Amy! She was so distressed that she allowed the whole incident to be broadcast to the world. It must have been so upsetting to have a man from the county on her property with a camera. How scary for her! She was so afraid of the guy that she wouldn't let him leave. If only there had been a camera crew there to protect her as she lap danced the intruder.

Rap541 said...

Yeah I trust everyone remembers that Amy got a paycheck for allowing TLC to publicize her emotional distress.

She got paid for this episode. She's a producer and has the power to say no.... At least thats what Matt et al have said... No doubt we'll discover the truth unless the county decides its easier to throw money at the Roloffs.

(Lil guess... I'll be shocked if this goes to trial)

BeckyM said...

Gotta make some money now that the show is over...

Erin B said...

Bringing on a lawsuit is not without risk or financial investment. I doubt the Roloff's did this on a whim or that they expect a huge windfall as a result. The freedoms of our country provide us the right to sue our government if we perceive a wrong has been committed against us. I am grateful for this as it is a much better system than a trial by public opinion.

abstractdaisy said...

Wouldn't you love to read the Roloff's petition about Amy's emotional distress...."I'm so distraught your honor that I can't clean my house, Jacob's failing school and Jeremy's breaking out in zits again. $200K will make it all better though..."

Timothy said...

Erin B, it's a pure and simple money grab.

I think they are hoping for a settlement. Free cash to make up for some of the lost income when TLC went from being prepared to pay them for 80 episodes down to only 20.

This kind of things screams of lack of morals. People that turn around and sue over everything make me sick.

No one was harmed. Nothing was stolen. The County apologized for the lack of professionalism (very gracious of them, imo). The man was reprimanded at his job.

Seriously seeking 200,000 claiming "emotional distress" it screams lack of morals.

The Roloffs don't seem much different than those low lifes that walk around stores looking for anything that looks like it could cause an accident so they can sue and claim injury. Scum.

Amy was plainly not frightened or concerned the man was thief or a deranged stalker there to harm Molly. Claiming she was severely stressed is simply a low life move from people that file lawsuits at every turn.

What a joke that the Roloffs wrote a book about big values or that Amy promotes herself as a motivational speaker....one who was so emotionally deveasted over the country inspector not telling her his name within the first 30 seconds of confronting her that she needs $200,000 ease her pain and her Christian forgiving nature refuses the County's gracious apology.

I hope the county fights this lawsuit and considers pursuing legal action of their own because I think the inspector has a cause against Amy.

Jason said...

Maybe this is why Matt and Amy didn't teach their kids any life skills, like how to fill out a job application or write a resume.

All they teach their kids is how to file absurd lawsuits in a get rich quick fix.

The Roloffs are a disgusting excuse for decent people.

Lucas said...

When I was a child I was hit by a truck. I nearly died, I still have scars today. It was the fault of the truck driver.

My father was advised to sue the driver and the company he was driving for as it would have been a lock and hell of a payday.

Upon looking into it, my father found that the driver was very remorseful, had 3 children of his own, and had worked as a driver for all of his adult life.

The man would have lost everything if my father had sued. My father decided against it.

It took until I was an adult to fully appreciate it. No amount of money will replace the respect I have for my father (who has since passed) for coming to that decision.

I wish more people in the world were like him and less like the Roloffs.

Nancy said...

The Roloffs legacy will be greedy money hungry people that will do and sue for anything and everything that they think will make them rich.

They should be ashamed of themselves.

M said...

Wow, I thought when they showed it on the show that it wasen't over. Just look at Amy in the episode after she confronted the guy, she looked happy. Like she defended her house from battle. How is that emotionally distressed? Just listed to what Matt and Amy said in the hay bales. They're looking for a hand out. It prob cost a lot of money to mantain the farm, support Jer and all the cars.

I want to know more on the burglars and threats to Molly. Is there actual truth to it? Maybe if they didn't show all the expensive items on tv....

aponce16 said...

It is a shame. Municipalities in Oregon are cutting services for poor families front and back and these leeches come and try to suck a bit more blood.
Shame on you Roloffs. Shame, Shame, Shame.

Aponce16 said...

... Remember the trip to Haiti? Well, the board members go a luxurious cruise trip (Why were Jer and Zach there is beyond me. Are they ARCF board members?) and what did they do for the Hattie people? Not much, really. They spent an hour playing games there and told them that they were going to get 100 school back packs (like the few they brought with them). Are you kidding me? Those people need fresh water, purification filters, food, MREs, Wood, construction tools, medicine, you know... real things. Instead, they got tokens and the finger from the ugly Americans. 100 Back packs with a few school supplies is an empty gesture when you are dying from cholera for lack of clean water. Oh, and how much 100 packs with supplies costs. The cruise trip for so many people was quite expensive if you ask me.

Since the show, I also learned that the school supplies were to arrive later so who knows is 10 back packs was all those Hattians received from those vacationing ladies from America.

Debra said...

http://www.kptv.com/news/26072742/detail.html

I can't get past this part "It also says Wheeler came into physical contact with Amy Roloff during the confrontation."

Duh? Amy's not taking any responsibility for her own behavior.

I wonder if Amy's family (parents and siblings) ever wonder what happened to the person they once knew.

Rap541 said...

"Bringing on a lawsuit is not without risk or financial investment. I doubt the Roloff's did this on a whim or that they expect a huge windfall as a result. The freedoms of our country provide us the right to sue our government if we perceive a wrong has been committed against us. I am grateful for this as it is a much better system than a trial by public opinion. "

If its not about the money, why not sue for one dollar and court costs?

If its the principle of the matter?

I mean, if the point isn't to cash in but to rub the county's face in the dirt - Matt and Amy percieve a wrong and want it publicized - why not sue for the apology and court costs if it's not about the money? If all the Roloffs want is the sweet moment in court (not public opinion court but real court) where the jury (essentially public opinion says "you win"?

If it's not about the money but the principle... why are they suing for 200k?

Shadow said...

Matt must be pathetically DESPERATE to keep his name in the news...

BeckyM said...

It is not without risk... Matt and Co. might lose some loyal fans due to their greed... oops! too late.

I can't believe this is making him the fan of any of the neighbors. Perhaps they will sell the farm after pissing off everyone who lives in a 10 mile radius of them.

abstractdaisy said...

@BeckyM: I was thinking the exact same thoughts. If TLC has a huge legal headache to go contend with providing the video and eyewitness accounts to this minor incident and quite possibly gets subpoened on this case--they'll be less inclined, if not already, to give favorable reviews to colleagues about working with the Roloffs. They may be "black balled" in Hollyweird for being liabilities and prima donnas.

jason said...

Let's say hypothetically they happen to win by some slim chance. They get 200 grand, and now think about their spending habits. I doubt they would get it all in one lump sum. Even if they do, I say it would be all gone no later than 2-4 months after they receive it.

Rap541 said...

Well, their lawyer would get a nice chunk too.

I think they'll settle out of court.

abstractdaisy said...

@Jason. You're generous with your 2 to 4 month time frame. By the time their attorney takes 1/3, plus costs, we're talking a lump sum (and we're assuming the take is $200K) of less than $130K. Take into consideration taxes and we'll assume the Roloff's pay their taxes both state and federal--they've got less than $100K. I'm an attorney so I'm fairly tuned into what may happen. The county will settle for oh, say, around $50K to $75K to make this go away which is exactly what the Roloff attorney's have predicted. Either way, Roloff's are looking for a quick buck.

I'd be delighted if Amy contributed all the golden goose egg to her charity but we know that won't happen since, from what I've heard, her charity is under scrutiny for possible fraudent non-profit declaration. Stay tuned.

still a fan said...

not for nothing but how scared was Amy that she just jumped into the vehicle without him having identified himself as a county inspector? it could have been a decoy vehicle. shows lack of insight on her part.

Vic Rattlehead said...

Around where I live we have a term for people like this.

We call them :money grubbing white trash.

I think that phrase very aptly describes Matt & Amy, they may have "status" from the money that TLC payed them and "respectability" (through their big house and possessions)but they act like (and are) white trash because no amount of money free stuff perks or attention is enough for them.

Considering that this whole event happened over a year ago and the statute of limitations has most likely expired any competent judge should see it for what it is (a nuisance suit)and dismiss it out of hand and then fine the Roloffs for wasting the courts time in binging a frivolous suit and order them to pay all court costs incurred by the county.

Thomas J said...

Apparently the people on this blog are not opposed to allowing big brother unfettered access to their property. But then what? After they roam around your garage and outbuildings will they then be walking into your homes without permission and taking pictures of who knows what? 200K after it is negotiated down and the lawyers get their cut is not even pocket change for the Roloff's. Then why would they go to the expense and trouble??? To make a statement about our constitutional rights. This was not just a minor oversight of government policy, it was a representative of our government going rogue and trampling an American Citizen's constitutional rights. If this incident is left unchecked, then what? This lawsuit will affirm that it is never okay for any government official to sneak under, over or around the American Constitution.

Brandon said...

Thomas, come on. Not about the money? It's all about the money.

Wow, the inspector was rude. I'm suing!

Washington County graciously apologized to the Roloffs. Why didn't the Christian Roloffs accept the apology? Did they miss the lessons in the Bible about forgiveness and not obsessing over money? Obviously.

The county said the inspector should have identified himself. That's it. He was rude to not do it first. The Roloffs received an apology and they guy got reprimanded.

Suing is not about the money? That's absurd, it's all about the money. $200,000 is a lot of money for "severe distress" because Amy and her gang of crew men saw the inspector taking pictures of the ark and he tried to remove himself from the situation when Amy flew off the handle at him (and then assaulted him).

Timothy said...

Does anyone remember the story from this pumpkin season when some old lady reportedly hit the gas instead of the break, crashed through a fence and almost hit a family that was eating at the Roloff food court?

I despise people that sue for everything, but now I hope the Roloffs get some karma and maybe that family will sue the Roloffs for the stress of almost being killed. Want to bet that the Roloffs would be held responsible somehow because the parking area might have been too close to the food area?

Other than for karma because the Roloffs are sue happy slime, I totally agree with the moral in the story Lucas told a few posts up.

People that file law suits because they think it's easy money lack moral values and character.

Rap541 said...

"After they roam around your garage and outbuildings will they then be walking into your homes without permission and taking pictures of who knows what?"

Did *that* happen?

No.

If it's about the principle of the matter, the Roloffs would be suing for a token amount. *IF* its about making a point and not getting money, then the money should be donated.

I would be impressed if the Roloffs stated the proceeds from the lawsuit would be donated to a charity. If its not about the money, why not?

Justin said...

Thomas, you're analogy is ludicrous. He is a building safety inspector. The Roloffs had one contraption that nearly killed a man and a child.

They had another one (that bridge) that nearly was the cause of injury when Zach almost drove a wagon of tourists off the side.

The bulding inspector came to make sure the boat wouldn't injure anyone.

Thomas J said...

It does not matter what his intention or his title. It is a violation of the Roloff's constitutional rights for that official to have entered onto their property without prior communication and proper paperwork. If you say that this should be overlooked then you will also have to overlook other government representatives overstepping their bounds. Police for example, should they be allowed to enter any home and search around for evidence without the proper warrant? Our constitution is what makes our country great. We can not allow even seemingly incidental events to pick away at the edges and erode the clear line of our rights as American Citizens.

NJC said...

"After they roam around your garage and outbuildings will they then be walking into your homes without permission and taking pictures of who knows what?"

Um no Thomas they won't be doing any of these things because we aren't running amusement parks in our back yard.

The County has every right to inspect a business to ensure that it's safe for the public. Should the board of health be giving restaurants a call to ask permission before they come to inspect? Should the Fire Inspector give a night club a heads up before checking that they're not exceeding their occupancy?

The Roloff's chose to turn their residence into a money making enterprise. In doing so they forfeited some privacy rights. They have to take the bad with the good of that decision.

Brandon said...

NJC, well said! Excellent. That is what the police office explained to Amy (when he told her why he wasn't going to arrest the inspector) and it makes perfect sense as you explained. The board of health don't call restaurants so they can inspect the kitchen. They show up unannounced to see the regular working condition of the site.

Rap541 said...

See, I am just struck by how on the show, Matt Roloff characterized this whole thing as a big misunderstanding, and not a violation of his constitutional rights.

Makes me wonder just what went on. Because it seems *odd* that Matt would call it a "big misunderstanding" with a bit of a "goobleygoo grin" on his tv show when... you know, his constitutional rights violated, his wife was physically violated... I'll be honest - his public comments made me think of this scenario for the show.

"Matt was called by the county and gave permission. Matt "forgets" to tell Amy the inspecter is coming. Hijinks ensue! Matt gets to make a condescending speech about how Amy *finally* gets it and loves the farm the way he wants."

I'm curious to see what the trial reveals, if there is a trial.

I'm also curious - since apparently this isn't about the money but the principle - what charity the Roloffs will be donating the proceeds to.

Probably not Shriner's Hospitals, huh? :)

Brandon said...

Thomas, let me make sure I'm understanding you right.

You are actually arguing that the Roloffs are not suing "for the money"? You don't think the purpose of the lawsuit is about being greedy and trying to get some easy money that they didn't work for?

Then why aren't they suing for $2.00 instead of $200,000? Why aren't they announcing that they'll award all winnings besides lawyer costs to charity?

Please explain the ridiculous "Amy suffered severe distress" because of security concerned and bringing in the irrelevant so-called threats they've received?

Severe emotional distress is typical lawyer BS when they are trying to suck out all the money they possibiliy can in a frivilous lawsuit.

Tell me Thomas. Do you *honestly* think Amy suffered "severe emotional distress"? Do you honestly think she (and her entourage of tv crew) thought the man with the pocket protector and the camera taking pictures of the ark that has been to the farm many times to investigate Matt's projects and Amy's deck was a deranged obsessed stalker that was possibly looking to rape Molly? Do you honestly believe Amy thought that? Honestly?

Any rational person knows why Amy wanted him out. She knows Matt and his projects and she knows the county investigates. She didn't want them getting fined if Matt had done something that wasn't inaccordance to "the code"? That is why she obviously wanted the camera from the inspector, because she knew he was a building inspector.

All the stuff in the lawsuit about being concerned about stalkers and threats against Molly is all complete garbage and typical lawsuit garbage that people include when they are trying to get as much money as they possibly can.

Brandon said...

By the way on kind of a related issue, if I was Indoor Goals or a player in that league, I would refuse to play or petition that they not allow Zach to play.

All those players playing against Zach and Indoor Goals are taking a huge risk.

There was a report that Zach already suffered a concussion playing.

The Roloffs have proven they are "the lawsuit type"? Just imagine if Zach was to get seriously injured from a collision with some 200 pound, 30 year old adult man playing rec soccer after a day at work?

The Roloffs are proving that they are the type of people that most Americans look down on because they walk around ready to sue at any moment they feel disrespected.

If Zach got hurt, I'm guessing that not only would they sue for Zach's injuries, but Matt and Amy would sue for the "severe emotional distress" they suffered from worrying about him.

In my opinion, the Roloffs are proving that they aren't honorable people, they look for any bogus lawsuits they can, because of that I think everyone involved with the soccer place and Zach playing should think about being sued by the sue happy Roloffs if Zach were to be injured during a game.

Rap541 said...

Brandon - the stuff about Molly and threats from stalkers isn't garbage, its just irrelevent when Amy is on camera identifying the guy as being from the county inspectors.

Its a sympathy ploy and it has nothing to do with any constitutional rights that may have been violated. I get why its being brought up but its not as though Amy's constitutional rights were MORE violated by this incident because there may be a creepy stalker.

Ronald said...

The Roloffs are an example of what is wrong with Americans these days.

Are you sure the Roloffs aren't liberals? They are sure acting like wimpy liberals.

Brandon said...

Rap, I meant the stalker stuff is garbage in this case. It has nothing to do with it. Christian Amy may very well lie in court and say she feared pocket protector inspector looking at the ark who has been to the farm many times to inspect the deck and other structures, was really the creepy stalker threatening to harm Molly, but I think everyone with intelligence knows that Amy did not think the inspector was the crazy stalker.

Since you're talking about the crazy stalker, until there are more details about it, I'm not willing to take the Roloffs at their word.

I don't doubt that over the years someone said something stupid, but a real legitimate fear-inflicting case involving Molly being a target? Like I said, until we hear all the details, there is no way I'm going to take the Roloffs word for it.

Everybody knows the Roloffs exagerrate and loves to play the sympathy card. I could see the Roloffs using someone saying "Oh, go jump off a cliff" as someone suggesting harm.

I wonder if Bob the parking customer has decided to sue Matt and the Mad Greek Pondo for cyber bullying and threatening him, didn't Pondo say he would tell Bob to go F himself? That must have caused poor Bob lots of emotional distress to be disrespected publicly! (PS. I'm just kidding in case you can't tell, but I have no respect for people that file lawsuits for stuff like that, but the Roloffs are asking for karma when they file these kinds of frivilous lawsuits against the county and other people)

Rap541 said...

Brandon 0 I think we agree and are just saying it in different ways.

If the lawsuit goes to trial (and my bet is that it won't because its a relatively easy amount to settle over) then the exact nature of the stalking incident or incidents may be publicized. Has there ever been an arrest? Maybe we'd find out.

Personally, yes, I do think the Roloffs have a tendency to exxagerate their woes... Thats why I am curious to see if they go all the way to a trial.

Still no word on what charity the lawsuit money is going to.

And now that you mention it - still no interviews of Matt Roloff discussing how he's been cyberbullyed in the national news media. I don't want to say he's lying but.... are the reporters submitting their story via Pony Express? :)

Ashley said...

I hope the county stands their grounds and does not settle.

People should be discouraged from filing these kinds of "emotional stress" lawsuits everytime you don't like some way you are treated in life.

Ironic that Amy's personal trainer's company is called "Suck it up"....Amy needs to take that advice instead of wasting taxpayers money.

Dan devoted democrat said...

Ashley, it's the Republican way. The Roloffs are Republican.

Republicans like to use up tax dollars on frivolous lawsuits and court costs by twisting and distorting facts instead of getting off their lazy butts and working to earn a living.

aponce16 said...

You see... This is why I think the Roloffs are such scumbags. The State of Oregon is in a terrible financial crisis since the Bush Administration and the Republican party messed up the economy of the United States. Well, the Roloffs live in Oregon and unless they are brain dead they have to know that suing the county is wrong. In Oregon schools, hospitals, police and other essential services are suffering due to the lack of cash. This just came today from an article :

"State Sen. Richard Devlin, D-Tualatin, and Rep. Chris Garrett, D-Lake Oswego, met with more than 100 city residents during a town hall meeting Thursday night in the West End Building, where they pulled no punches in explaining that the state has budget problems of its own.
The two lawmakers said they expect to be staring down an estimated $3.5 billion budget shortfall heading into the 2011-2013 biennium and warned residents to anticipate cuts to services such as education and public safety in the future."

Link follows:

http://www.oregonlive.com/lake-oswego/index.ssf/2011/01/state_sen_richard_devlin_rep_chris_garrett_lake_oswego_town_hall_meeting_35_billion_state_budget_sho.html

They know these things but they ignore it. Then they go on radio and TV claiming the high moral ground and pretending to be right about suing the county. These people are robbing school districts of books, heat, teachers, nurses, cops... This is morally wrong. They claim to be Christian but what they are is just a bunch of greedy grifters.

Lynn C said...

The Roloffs are to blame for budget cuts? C'mon!!....

SDH said...

You people are missing the point behind the suit. The Roloff's, like it or not, are still guaranteed the Constitutional Right against illegal searches. It's part of the Fourth Amendment in our Constitution. It's not about Christianity, it's not about emotional distress, it's not about money. It's about what is right and what is wrong. It's not right for any government official to illegally enter a premise to conduct searches without the proper authority. With that being said...I'll elaborate.

It's true food inspectors don't have to call ahead and notify restaurants that they will be coming for an inspection. But it is also true that when an inspector arrives for an inspection, they arrive when the business is open to the public and they present identification to show their authority to conduct a search.

"The Roloff's chose to turn their residence into a money making enterprise. In doing so they forfeited some privacy rights. They have to take the bad with the good of that decision," from NJC.

Since when does a business lose it's right to privacy? What you are implying is that since the mall is a money making enterprise, I cannot get in trouble for entering the premises after hours or when it is closed to the public because they have no right to privacy? So basically, any building is free for people to just enter anytime they want to?

The facts, from what we know, is that the inspector entered the property lines without notifying the owners of his intentions before doing so. And when I say "before doing so" I mean, he didn't have to call ahead and tell them he was coming, but when he arrived there, he should have notified the owners then and explained why he was there. Second, the property is private property that has posted "No Trespassing" signs and a gate that the inspector blantantly ignored. It's the same concept as if a food inspector arrived at Burger King when it was closed and picked the lock to enter it to do an inspection. Third, the inspector, when confronted by Amy, did not identify himself or made his intentions known, rather, he quickly removed himself from the premises and tried to make a fast escape in his truck. An inspector who was conducting a proper inspection would not have had any problems identifying himself and letting Amy know why he was there. However, by his actions of ignoring her, is almost prima facie evidence to show that he was not there legally.

At the time of the show, we all saw Amy smiling and acting like it was nothing. Sure, she's continued to do her motivational speeches. But everyone wants to assume that because of her smiles and her continuing her motivational speeches, she did not suffer emotional distress. How do you know that? Do we always know that a person suffers from depression? Is it automatically assumed that because a smiling, happy couple seems so in love that behind closed doors, their life is perfect? You don't know that, so stop assuming.

The beauty of our government is that court cases are not decided based on assumptions. They're decided based on facts. And the fact is, the inspector violated the Roloff's Fourth Amendment rights. Accepting an apology only makes it seem like a minute infraction and that an apology is good enough to move on with. But it's not. Our government cannot just decide to overstep boundaries because they feel like they're doing the right thing. Then what would be the point in having the legal system? They must be accounted for in all their actions as much as we are as citizens. So, why $200,000? Why not? If the government can put high price tags on the people for violations or fees, why shouldn't we be able to put a price tag against them when they were in the wrong?

Anonymous said...

http://search.municode.com/html/16681/level2/T8_C8.20.html

Title 8 Health and Safety, chapter 8.20 Nusiances - 8.20.070 Inspection, right of entry -
The health officer or his authorized representative shall conduct such inspections as he deems necessary to insure compliance with all provisions of this chapter and shall have right of entry at any reasonable hour to investigate complaints and to insure abatement of nuisances as provided in this chapter.


If Washington County has complaints on record about the ark, per the law they do have right of entry to investigate. Per a recent article, Matt and Amy gave the inspector access codes to the farm's security system.

David said...

Anon, agreed. That does sound like something Matt would do to speed along the projects, tell the inspector he has access so he can clear it with the contractors avoiding delays.

I think it is the logical explanation for Matt's very calm response on camera. This is Matt we're talking about. If he felt he was wronged in the moment, he would have been more livid than Amy. Instead his initial reaction was "it's all a big misunderstanding'...why? Because he knew that he told Mr. Wheeler that he could enter the property to avoid delays? The other piece of information that I think is relevant is the fact that Wheeler is not some stranger. He has been dealing with the Roloffst for at least 5 years and probably much longer. He was the same inspector from the second season that ultimately approved throwing dirt under the deck to ensure the railings met the code. That explains why Matt would grant him access, because Matt knew to get any of his projects done he would need to go through Wheeler.

Anonymous said...

amy needs the money for platform shoes