Thursday, June 23, 2011

Jeremy and Zach Roloff Friend Arrested For Allegedly Posing As Doctor

This isn't really about the Roloffs, but this is too bizarre of a story not to at least mention in passing.

One of Jeremy and Zach's friends that they've known for many years and that friends tell us they've 'hung out' with as recently as earlier this year, was arrested for allegedly posing as a doctor.

He was also arrested in May and charged with negotiating a bad check. He was actually arrested for that on the Roloff twins 21st birthday -- people had alerted us that one of their friends was arrested the night of their big 21st birthday bash party (yes there was more to the twins 21st birthday than a family dinner with mom) -- but we didn't pass that along because it was unrelated to the Roloffs party and he isn't one of the friends that fans know from the Little People, Big World unlike Jacob Mueller, Dan Meichtry, Scott LeSage, Jen Montzingo or Marty Klebba.

However this is rather bizarre and in the news, so for people in Oregon you might find it interesting when watching the news to know that the man accused of this is actually a friend of Jeremy and Zach Roloff.

Saturday, June 18, 2011

Brother Of Boy With Dwarfism Bullied

This isn't about the Roloffs -- it's about a show that was on the BBC in the UK called My Life: Big Brother.

We just thought we would pass it on for Roloff followers because it's kind of interesting to compare how the dynamics and experiences of another family may differ from the Roloffs since one of the original elements of LPBW was about one average height brother and one with dwarfism. Although this is a bit different since the brother has more severe medical problems than Zach and has severe mobility issues due to the bone condition.


Teenage carer bullied over having 'small' family

Fourteen-year-old Ethan has a tough time helping care for his younger brother and his mother who have a form of dwarfism called skeletal dysplasia.

"The best thing about being smaller than everyone else is that you can fit down the back of the sofa, and it's handy for when you're playing hide and seek and things, because you can hide where everyone else can't," said 10-year-old Aidan.

Ethan's little brother Aidan has a genetic condition which means his bones did not develop properly, affecting his height and movement. He inherited it from his mother, Michelle, and it means Aidan often has to use a wheelchair.

Michelle said: "It affects all our joints and it's a curvature of the spine, which Aidan has had corrected, and also all the long bones are curved as well."

Aidan and Ethan, who are from Cambridge, have a unique relationship.

While their father Lee, who is a support worker for adults with disabilities, is at work, Ethan helps get Aidan dressed and takes him to school, as well as help his mother cook dinner and with housework.

Ethan said: "Sometimes I get annoyed, but that's life and you just have to get on with it."

But sometimes helping his brother can cause friction between the pair.

Aidan said: "It can be a bit frustrating when I want to do something myself and Ethan comes in and helps.

"(But) Sometimes it can be good because you don't have to do everything when you can't sort of do it yourself."

Ethan has found that the toughest thing to cope with was bullying, which has been so bad he has been forced to move schools.

"People at my old school used to take the Mick - like calling my mum a midget and oompa loompa," he said.

"I've found not to tell anyone at school. Over the years I've had quite a bit of bullying.

"In my old school, how it started was they'd ask why my mum was small and I'd tell them that she was born with a bone condition and they just thought it was funny."

At the height of the bullying, Ethan was walking home from a party with his mother when he was attacked in the street by a stranger.

"A boy just walked up to us and started shouting he then pushed me off my bike, and I hurt my knee and my hand, and he started hitting me and kicking me, asking me who I was.

"I didn't reply and he retaliated more. I managed to get away on my bike and he threw a glass bottle at me and it hit me in the back."

He reported the assault to the police, and his attacker was sentenced to 80 hours of community service.

He said: "The advice I'd give someone who's getting bullied is to tell someone and not suffer in silence."

Living with limited movement also means Aidan has to face daily challenges.

He was desperate to regain his independence and walk up stairs by himself, and after an operation to straighten his legs, he underwent intensive therapy to build up his strength.

The 10-year-old needed hydrotherapy treatment, but feared water, as earlier in life he had had a breathing tube.

But after some initial fears, he embraced the pool.

"When I got in the pool for the first time, I was very wobbly. But then afterwards I didn't want to get out again," Aidan said.

But he already has set himself a new challenge: "I'd like to play football next."

Ethan has also set himself a challenge, to become a DJ. After studying the craft in music lessons with his friends, he played in front of his school friends at a school disco for the first time.

He wanted Aidan to share the experience, and got him on stage with him. And that brotherly support meant he had the confidence to perform.

"It's quite scary but once Aidan came on I really enjoyed it. It really helped when I was helping him."


Thanks to Gary Arnold of the LPA for linking this story on his "Common Ground" blog:

Monday, June 13, 2011

Some Spiritswander Site Stats And The Roloff Family

In honor of Matt's recent Facebook posts where he posted statistics about the number of views, we thought that it might be interesting for our readers to see some of our statistics.

This would be a good place to thank all of our visitors for your interest (although there is no financial gain made at all!) in our site.

When this site was first started, we never envisioned that it would become a daily source of Roloff news and discussions to the degree that it would get 1000, 2000, 5000, on occasion over 15,000 and 59,000 hits in a single day.

We've spoken with some other Roloff blogs that no longer seem to be around or active, they used to say they didn't get 100 hits in a week. It's very hard to gain a following and become a mainstay as an independent and objective site about people from a cable reality show -- so thanks for your interest in what we do. To consistently receive 1000 or 2000 views a day even when we don't have new content on a specific day and since the show has been cancelled is quite astounding to us, but much appreciated. Articles we published two years ago still are being read every day and hopefully answering people's inquiries that they have about the Roloff family.

Honestly, after the show was cancelled, I was expecting traffic to fall off rather drastically. I didn't imagine there would be about 1800 -2300 views on most days.

Thank you to all that help contribute to our site (you know who you are :-)). Thanks to our visitors for your interest and trust in our reporting and accuracy in attempting to be as honest as possible about the Roloff Family. A person might not always agree with a certain topic, but without question, I feel confident in saying that a person that regularly frequents our site has a much better understanding of what the Roloffs are really like and what is really going on than if you relied on getting your Roloff information from any other site -- which basically leaves Matt Roloff run sites -- Matt's Facebook page, Matt's Roloff World Blog, -- All of those sites operate under the control and approval of Matt.

Perhaps the content on our site has improved your opinion of the Roloffs or perhaps it crushed your previous opinion of the Roloffs, but without a doubt you can count yourself as informed and know that news and facts about the Roloffs are not being censored from you on this site.

And thanks of course to the Roloffs! Any interest in our site is based on the overall interest in the Roloffs. You can learn a lot about people in general from observing the Roloffs and they are an interesting social study on human behavior and at times -a public image vs the real people.

Visitors sometimes ask; Spiritswander, you've been reporting on the Roloffs for many years, have many connections to friends and associates -- what should fans know about the Roloffs? We don't like seeing good-hearted, trusting individuals be made fools of, so my advice would be realize that most of the information about the Roloffs, aside from our site, comes from the Roloffs themselves. There is obviously an understandable agenda and anything coming from Matt is usually drenched in Matt Roloff's classic spin soup :)

There is a reason why only Matt (and sometimes Amy) speak on "behalf of the family" despite Jeremy and Zach's advancing age. There is a reason why if Matt had his way, friends of the Roloffs would not speak about them. They would never admit this of course, but the Roloffs don't feel any obligation to be honest or truthful to the fans. It's kind of sad actually considering the reason why many become so fond of the Roloffs was because they seemed "real", but the Roloffs generally have no moral conscience or guilt about being dishonest or misleading with the fans. Roloff friends have referred to the Roloff sites that they operate themselves as "total fluff" and scoff at it. Other friends from time to time have said they would see the Roloffs say something about their lives and would question the Roloffs about it or wonder what that was about? The Roloffs reply, 'Don't be dumb! We just said that for the fans'.

So I think that's what people should know. As soon as there is fan interaction, the Roloffs cease being themselves and that explains why there are so many stories always popping up that contradict the "Roloff image".

With no further delay, the statistics. As you can see, while LPBW was still on, Monday and particularly Tuesday were the days where we receive the most traffic -- as people came to the internet searching for discussion or more information about the episodes:
Click on the pictures to enlarge:

By the way, these are some of the most popular keyword phrases that bring people to the site. Obviously it changes daily, but in the last few days/weeks, these are pretty consistent. Some have been the same for years

"What happened to the Roloffs"
"Matt and Amy Roloff divorce"
"Jeremy Roloff scandal"
"Jeremy Roloff shirtless"
"Matt Roloff 2011"
"Jacob Roloff expelled"
"Jeremy Roloff Accident" (not sure what is spurring that one on)

Saturday, June 11, 2011

Matt Roloff's Unsuccessful Lawsuit VS Former Employer Re: Disability Discrimination

When discussing the Roloffs current lawsuit against Washington County, people occasionally refer to Matt's past history of lawsuits. Sometimes when people allude to things about public figures, you wonder if it's rumor, fact or what exactly was the whole story?

During an episode of Little People, Big World in Season Six, viewers heard Matt while giving a presentation refer to his past employment. He told a story about being hired without being seen by his employer and then feeling that they were disappointed and shocked when they met him and saw that he had dwarfism.

It is true that Matt did actually sue a former employer whom he worked for in 2001/2002 on the grounds of disability discrimination. The judge ruled against Matt -- and actually the judge's decision against Matt was very strongly worded (such as "only the plaintiffs own self-serving statements about his job performance..." or "Plaintiff grossly overstates the evidence or draws unsupportable inferences from the record"

We have the public record with a detail explanation of the case and the judge's decision which was dated May 2006. For people wondering about a Little People, Big World timeline, the Roloffs began filming the season one of the Little People, Big World series in 2005 and it began airing in March 2006.

We thought people might find it interesting to see the details of Matt's lawsuit and the verdict for themselves. The document is located here:

It is quite lengthy so we will attempt to briefly summarize the main part of the case -- although you're encouraged to read it for yourself.

Basically, this is the story...Matt was hired by SAP America in November 2001. In July 2001 - the company had decided to establish a new sales force called CRM Sales team (Customer Relationship Management). Matt was hired in Nov 2001 as a CRM Solution Engineer.

By June of 2002 -- upper management determined that the CRM Sales Force was a failure and disbanded the CRM unit -- terminating some Solution Engineers and moving some others into other jobs in the organization. There were 125 people affected -- 50 other Solution Engineers and Matt Roloff affected.

According to the company (which Matt disputed) they determined which Solution Engineers would be terminated based on a number of performance criteria -- things like analytical and operation skills, technical knowledge, revenue, etc.)

According to them, out of the 51 Solution Engineers - Matt ranked in last place. Four Executives were laid off at the same time. Matt's original boss had been fired in Feb 2002 for "performance related reasons".

Matt sued the company alleging disability discrimination. The document is quite detailed, but the crux of the lawsuit seems to revolve around a series of emails between Matt and his boss regarding his boss asking Matt to represent the company at a Trade Show in Anaheim, April 7th 2002. Matt emailed him expressing concern about the height of the booths. Matt said in the past he had difficulty reaching keyboards and wondered if his lack of mobility impedes his effectiveness and asked his boss for his thoughts. His boss thought it would be fine.

Matt's boss then emailed several other people, the Director of Events, etc. That person said if they knew which booth or "pod" Matt would be using they would make appropriate modifications.

Then someone involved the Human Resources Business Partner. They wrote an email to Matt's boss:

"My concern is that if Matt is to work the pod and he may need a special accommodation to do this, we need time in advance to make the arrangements/evaluate the cost to do this. Matt may not feel this is the best use of his time, but this is not his call. If the mobility issue is a factor, we need to try to eradicate it as best we can, so he can still function at ASUG."

Matt's boss then emailed Matt explaining that there is a stool that sits on a raised pedestal. He asked Matt if that presented a problem?

Matt wrote back:

I'll give you the bottom line.
It's not easy for me at Tradeshows—It's difficult to talk with people when they are standing and "milling" around. When the terminals are high it's even more challenging.
I used to do them often and can make it work. I'll be happy to do ASUG if you think it's best. If you don't care—I'd prefer to pass. Either way I'm a happy camper."

Matt then emailed the Director of Events. The Director of Events asked Matt to reply back if he knew what type of pod would be used. Then the Director then emailed Matt's boss saying that Matt hadn't replied back about the type of pod being used. Matt's boss emailed Matt asking him to email two more people to find out what type of pod would be used.

Matt emailed his boss the following, saying not to worry about it and it was embarrassing that there were so many people involved. Matt said he would just crawl up on the stool.

"Bill, Let's not worry about this anymore. I've left a voice message for Dan—If Dan (or I will) bring a small step stool. I'm sure I can get up on the bar stools. It's more embarrassing to be making a big deal out of it and contacting half the world to try and figure this out.
I never met a stool I couldn't somehow crawl up on. It may look funny—But I can always get up."

Matt's boss replied::

"Hi Matt,
Good enough for me. My intention here is to let you know that we are committed to removing any obstacles that would prevent your participation in these shows. I don't want you to feel uncomfortable about it, just that we are committed to affording you reasonable accommodations when requested and where required.

Matt didn't make any more requests about it and successfully worked the trade show and did not report any difficulties.

This picture of Matt in the Ewok costume that was displayed
on Matt's website, factored into the judge ruling against Matt.
His boss had told Matt she heard he had played in Ewok in Star
Wars. Matt said he found the comment offensive and dismissive.

Another incident cited in Matt's lawsuit was his initial meeting with one of the upper managers - director of Solutions Support - Mary Sibley. Matt alleged this was one of two derogatory comments made about him. In his first meeting with Ms. Sibley, Matt said she mentioned that she had heard that Matt had played an Ewok in the Star Wars films. In the lawsuit, Matt said he found the comment offensive and dismissive of his accomplishments.

The judge ruled against Matt that the comment was discrimatory based on 3 reasons:

1. Matt acknowledged the comment was made in a friendly demeanor and tone when they were talking about his experiences.

2. Matt did indeed play an Ewok in Star Wars.

3. Matt had displayed a picture of himself in the Ewok costume on his own website which was developed by a friend of Matt's. The judge concluded that showed that Matt did not object to the picture or reference.

The judge ruled in favor of the Defendant in the case. The explanation is quite lengthy, but included:

"Plaintiffs declaration offers nothing more than his own self-serving statements about his job performance and value to the company. He does not show that less qualified, non-disabled Solutions Engineers were retained. He does not produce evidence of the performance of other Solutions Engineers to show that he was somehow treated less favorably because of his disability and thereby cast doubt on defendant's articulated legitimate, nondiscriminatory motive. Moreover, the Ninth Circuit has held that "an employee's subjective personal judgments of his competence alone do not raise a genuine issue of material fact."

Accordingly, plaintiff fails to produce specific and substantial circumstantial evidence of pretext to create a genuine dispute about defendant's articulated motive. Defendant's motion should be granted.[5]


Defendant's motion for summary judgment (# 22) should be granted.",+Inc&hl=en&as_sdt=802&as_vis=1

Friday, June 10, 2011

Amy Roloff Coffee Chat Review June 10 - Amy Criticizes Jersey Shore, Housewives of ..., and Political Scandals

Just like old times when Little People, Big World was on, one of our Guest Reviewers -- Rap541 -- graciously offered to review/recap a Roloff show -- Amy's coffee chat summary. Amy was critical of reality shows such as Jersey Shore and Housewives of .... as well as some of the recent political scandals.

You can view Amy's coffee chat on the following link:


Written by Rap541

Spirit was busy so I offered to do a write up of Amy’s Coffee Chat.

As we start, Amy is being encouraged to be the next Oprah by her staff. She is all “I just want a show”. Her tone is totally different when talking with the staff. I mean, it goes from grumbles to pleasant like that. LIKE THAT. She starts with pitching her sites, and then jumps into Representative Weiner’s business. Apparently its just now occurring to Amy that things on the internet aren’t private and that everyone on the internet can have an opinion. This soon gets hilarious.

Amy seems very, very angry about the lies, and the skirting around things and I find myself thinking “Gosh Amy, is this really place you want to go? When is filming starting for new episodes since Matt thought he already announced new episodes?” I mean, good lord, talk about skirting around… Anyway she feels people with power are held to higher standard and should be role models. She keeps calling Weiner “Weiner Whiner” and says he should go. She then equates this to being a mom and its actually a bit of a confused mess as she says its wrong to manipulate kids to take sides. Heh. She seems shocked Schwarzseneggar was screwing around. I mean, really, who didn’t know that Arnold was a man whore? I imagine Amy was surprised that George Takei is gay.

This all goes into a jumble of things where Amy judges “Weiner Whiner” despite not knowing him. Don’t get me wrong, the guy is a public figure and when people are in the media, they need to have some awareness that they can’t just randomly sex text (“sext”) women and not be noticed. It’s like say, being on a reality show and leaving your Myspace setting to public and then saying a whole lotta racist things. You’re in the media, people are going to look you up and judge you by your public ramblings.

On the other hand, Amy is very much someone who getting on an awfully high horse considering the number of things her husband says. (I’m just saying, we never did see those interviews Matt says he did in the national media on the topic of celebrities and cyber bullying.)

Next she discusses watching 20/20 and how it was about reality shows. Apparently it was mostly about the Housewives franchise. Amy thinks that doesn’t represent how awesome reality shows are. AND IT WAS NOT SCRIPTED. She harps on that a lot. She does admit to being camera conscious and aware when the cameras are on… I‘d say her total change in tone at the start of the show is a huge sign of that.. Amy doesn’t seem to like Jersey Shore. She doesn’t want those young people to be role models. She cites these shows as crude and feels its wrong to reward people for crude behavior and says kids get the wrong idea when bad behavior is rewarded.

God, it’s hilarious coming from someone who has allowed her husband’s fan base to applaud her son being kicked out of school. Then she bitches about the Housewives. Apparently Amy would rather be poor than be on those shows. Gosh, am I getting a wee bit of a jealous vibe? Amy feels being arrogant and outlandish to tell a story is wrong. She notes that it “bubbles up” things in your life and suspects Jon and Kate imploded because of the show and that it brings up issues and exposes them…

Amy continues to insist the show LPBW was about educating and advocating, and facing challenges. Basically she feels her experience was great and those other shows are very, very wrong and outlandish with bad behavior. I strongly suspect that if Amy and her friends were offered a Real Housewives of Portland shot, she’d take it in a minute and justify it by noting how its all about promoting ACRF. (I’m not a huge Housewives fan but I do watch the New York version, and let me tell you, there’s a whole lotta charity work filmed. I sense the green eyed monster….)

Amy does like the Biggest Loser and Amazing Race. She also loves Undercover Boss, which I find hilarious because of how obviously scripted it is. Then she praises Extreme Home Makeover. She continues harping on how things are scripted but not really scripted but…. Basically she wiffles back and forth on the script issue.

Question - did it put a strain on your marriage? Amy is all “you bet!” She refers to weathering the storm and being on the other side. Amy is totally open to doing more reality tv as long as its meaningful. She has plans! We’ll see what happens!

Next - Amy needs a new car and ABC is doing a show on cars made in the USA. She plans to watch the show and see if the majority of the parts are made in the USA. She wants to buy a US made car. Yeah, sadly I don’t think that be easy.

Then she seems to wrap it up and then mentions her guest. She’s all about hearing about our plans for summer.

Then she hauls in Patrick Lamb. They chitchat about her jewelry. Patrick has won a Grammy, good for him. He loves Amy’s message of hope… They kiss each other’s asses for a few minutes on how awesome they are. Patrick is apparently releasing a new cd and he’s on coffee chat pitching it. He continues the joke that Amy will soon work for Harpo Entertainment. They talk about the music for a bit. Patrick apparently knows people in Japan and there’s sad talk about his friends there and how he held a benefit. The general theme is “Help Japan” and “A little bit still helps”.

They continue talking about Patrick, and how his grandma died recently. I honestly get bored and start skipping forward. Amy has burnt the crisp she was making. Then the tape starts skipping around… some sort of tech issue. I mean its been herky jerky the whole time and it grinds to a halt. Then it jumps and Amy is accepting a thingie of whipping cream from Jeremy for some reason. For the crisp? Patrick and Amy continue going on about the new cd, and in the background you can hear Jeremy talking with someone. Rocky appears to be on the couch in the background. Patrick sadly has no samples of his music. Amy then tongue bathes Patrick and declares how awesome awesome he is. This goes on for a bit. Then the tech issues really kick in and I wait a few minutes for it start again.

Amy was going to make whipped cream but decides to skip it. Now we have comments - everyone loves Patrick’s music. Then Amy and Patrick sing “You are my sunshine”.

Amy finally says the vacations will probably be close to home and they may go to Michigan and they will do college visits because Jeremy still has no place to live. She wants to see her parents…Amy wants to reconnect with the kids. She wants everyone to tell her what their plans are to regroup as a family. Then we get another check my face book pitch and they are thanking the jeweler as well. The pitching of the charity is near endless. Ironically, for all that Patrick’s website was mentioned as in “go check Patrick’s website”, I honestly did not ever catch the actual name of the site.

Friday, June 3, 2011

Pre-trial Deadline Approaching for Roloff Lawsuit vs Washington County

Some people have been inquiring about the status of the Roloff lawsuit vs Washington County.

The pre-trial deadline is in September. No trial date appears to have been set yet.

The suit was originally filed in November 2010 in state court, but was transfered to U.S District court and filed December 6th, 2010. Ironically, the series finale of Little People, Big World aired on December 6th.

For anyone unfamiliar with this story, the Roloffs are suing Washington County in the amount of $200,000 plus legal costs for "severe emotional distress" suffered by Amy Roloff. The Roloffs are also seeking an injunction "barring further unauthorized inspections".

The entire incident was filmed (in July 2010) and aired in an episode of Little People, Big World entitled "Little Noah".

The episode centered around Matt purchasing and transporting a large boat that resembled Noah's Ark to Roloff Farms as a pumpkin season attraction.

The Roloffs lawsuit claims that Washington County Building Inspector, John Wheeler, trespassed on their property. The Roloffs allege that he was acting on instructions from his supervisor and passed through numerous "No Trespassing" signs, passed a lock gate, and ignored a call box he could have used. The Roloffs state that Amy asked him for his identity and his disposable camera he was using to take pictures. Their suit states that Wheeler refused to identify himself or hand over the camera to Amy Roloff. He headed towards his county vehicle with Amy in pursuit as she called 911.

The Roloffs suits states "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 Roloffs lawsuit claims they have an increased sensitivity towards intruders due to their substantial celebrity. Their case notes other encounters where people have threatened to harm them and states the burglars have entered their home before.

Washington County has denied wrong doing in the case. They have stated that their primary goal is the safety of all county residents. They claim they received calls from neighbors about a large boat like structure on the Roloffs property and were concerned it could topple over and injure someone. That was the reason why Wheeler visited the property.

Washington County claims that the Roloffs previously gave Wheeler permission and access codes to enter the property to discuss construction with their contractors.

The county acknowledges that Wheeler stepped through a fence to take photos, but contend that the entry was limited to viewing the structure in an open field.

They state that the inspector complied when he was asked to leave the property and that Amy Roloff was physically aggressive with John Wheeler.

Matt and Amy Roloff had producing credits of this episode of Little People, Big World. Washington county have suggested that some details may have been omitted from the episode that aired.

The edited episode that was televised depicted Amy driving up to the inspector in her Mercedes asking "Does anybody know you're here? Can I have your name and card? I would like you to leave right now." The episode footage then shows Mr. Wheeler walking away from the vehicle without responding. Amy begins to yell "Excuse me, come here! Sir!" The inspector responded "I'm just getting off the property like I was asked."

Amy ran after Wheeler telling him that she wanted his camera and all the pictures he had taken. He said it was government property. Amy ran in front him, physically pushed him back and attempted to prevent him from walking by stepping in front him. This part of the video actually does show Amy Roloff physically pushing John Wheeler to prevent him from walking. The Roloff lawsuit states that Wheeler "came into physical contact with Amy" which refers to later when Amy climbed onto his lap in his vehicle as they battled over the driver seat. Washington County's response describes it as Amy being physically aggressive towards the inspector. On the show, while sitting in her car talking the television camera, a smiling Amy described herself as "Mother Bear" "when it comes to my kids and where I live".

She was heard repeatedly asking the Inspector for his name. He was not heard answering Amy's question. Amy called Matt on her phone as they were walking towards the vehicle to ask him if he knew the man was coming. She asked him for his name, he was only heard responding "Can I talk to Matt?" Amy said no, she is the owner of the property and the inspector was refusing to tell her his name.

When they reached an old gate where Wheeler's vehicle that was marked "Washington County Land Use and Transportation" was parked, Amy said "The gate is locked so how did you get it? There is even no trespassing signs". Wheeler responded "There is no sign on this gate." At which point, editors/producers then flashed to two "No Trespassing" and "No personal or professional photograps" signs that were actually posted on a different gate.

Amy prevented Wheeler from entering his vehicle on the driver said and said she was calling 911. He went around to the passenger door and attempted to move over to the driver's seat. At that point, Amy climbed in through the driver's seat and climbed onto Wheeler's lap. While in the vehicle, Amy was asking for his business card. He eventually gave it to her.

When police arrived and Amy told the police officer that the man had illegally entered their property, the officer said he understands that it wasn't illegal. Amy responded "So anybody can come onto our property anytime they please? The officer said the County Building Inspectors don't always notify people when they are coming because they don't want to let the people know when they'll be inspecting.

Matt has since said that it was the officer's response that "put them over the edge" and convinced them to sue.

For the record, the following is on the Washington County website regarding Health and Safety Inspections:

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."

On camera, when Matt arrived, he said "apparently there was a very big miscommunication and they know they've done something wrong." In his "barn bite" interview Matt said "They thought I was up to something illegal. They come out here and find he's just lifting a boat off a trailer -- oops."

The inspector John Wheeler was seen in the past on Little People, Big World. In the second season, he was the inspector that Matt dealt with regarding regulations on the height of the railings for their deck. In that episode, Matt and Amy were upset that the regulations would create an obstructed view on their own deck because of their dwarfism. The counter argument to that was that there are average height members of the Roloff family as well as friends and visitors and the railing requirements needed to be met to ensure safety for all. The inspector told Matt that the railing codes had been in the books for years and years. Matt responded that Little People have been discriminated against for years and years. Matt got around the regulations by throwing dirt underneath the deck which raised the height of the ground. Wheeler eventually approved that.

The inspector, shown here, years earlier in the Roloff home discussing
railing code regulations with Matt

Wendy Culverwell of the Portland Business Journal had the original story about the lawsuit and then Washington County's response: