Thursday, May 23, 2013

Roloffs Claim They Are Victims Of Death Threats

A local news station in Oregon, KATU, had an article today where Matt and Amy Roloff are claiming they are receiving serious death threats. KATU is the local Portland station where Matt and Amy have often appeared on the morning show for fluffy segments. Amy appears to be a friend of one of the hosts.

Matt and Amy claim that they are receiving Facebook messages and emails supposedly "threatening to kill and rape Amy and their daughter Molly by tying them to their beds. There's also a threat to use a bomb to blow up the farm where they live." 

The article says: "The Roloffs are a resilient bunch. They've been on television in some form for a decade. But this latest twist in their celebrity life includes threats like "death to the midgets" along with attacks on their disabilities, the sexual orientation of their kids and even their Christianity."

Matt says he called 911 last month because "I'm leaving at four in the morning for the airport, there's a suspicious car outside our gate that's raced off – I tried to chase it – I called 911, and I'm trying to follow it. I'm like, 'OK, I've got the guy on a dead-end road, I know he's got to come out of there.' And they're like, 'Well, OK, we'll try to dispatch somebody' (click)."

In the story, Matt is quick to criticize the FBI and Washington County's Sheriff's office because Matt is not confident they are taking the threats seriously.

Matt goes onto say: "It's concerning," Matt said. "And I'd be lying if I didn't say I was keeping my clip in my weapon at night, wondering if someone's going to come into the house and carry out some of these threats." 

Amy adds:  "What I'd like to see happen is that you can't hide behind Facebook or emails or any electronic stuff," she said. 

Matt: "If you're going to go out and do death threats, you need to be accountable to it. So I think society has to come up with ways to expose people that put out stuff like this."

 KATU called Washington County regarding the issue and states: "A spokesman for the Washington County Sheriff's Office says they did send units out that morning – when Matt called 911 – but couldn't find a car matching the description that Matt gave. The sergeant who spoke to KATU News did make a point of following up with the Roloffs Wednesday afternoon to track down why so little had been done about what they'd reported to Washington County. He said they are now taking this very seriously. The FBI will neither confirm nor deny it has an active investigation into the Roloff's concerns. The person or persons behind the threats are using emails and Facebook profiles, but it is unclear whether those are actual people making the threats or if those innocent people had their profiles hacked."

In the video, the KATU investigative reporter says that a skeptic would say that this kind of thing is the "price of fame". Amy responds: "We dealt with another incident; just because we choose to give up some of my privacy does not mean you have every 100 percent of my privacy."

It's unclear as to which "incident" Amy is referring to. She has used that defense before when she or members of the Roloff family have been criticized in the past such as Jeremy's infamous Myspace Scandal when he used racial and homophobic slurs with his friends. When Amy has vaguely mentioned the incident, she has indicated that because it was not meant to be known by the public, that it was private and people don't have a right to know about. She also has used the "privacy" issue when people have questioned her about the Roloffs affiliation with the Solid Rock Church and their message that gay people should pray to Jesus to be cured. The Roloffs have been asked flat out what they believe because of their status as paid diversity speakers about acceptance. When Amy refused to give a definitive answer, she said it was private.


You can read the full article here: http://www.katu.com/news/investigators/Little-people-big-problem-Roloffs-get-death-threats-208581481.html or what the video below:





=========================================================================


Spiritswander's opinion? First of all, obviously, I think any legitimate and serious threats of harm to anybody are awful and the perpetrator should be punished. One would think that threats of rape or bomb threats could be easily traced and tracked.

However, I think that the type of messages they flashed up in the video, the "Death to midgets! U r all stoopid! Die!".....I think those types of messages, while unfortunate, are typical for anyone with any celebrity. Even non celebrities that post You Tube videos or "Vlogs" receive those types of "hate messages".

You can pretty much go to any You Tube or public Facebook video about an athlete or a singer and see similar type of messages - whether it's Lebron James or Justin Bieber - where tough talking commentators say stuff like "I hope he dies!", "Someone should throw a brick at his head", etc. I recall hearing about a story a few years ago about the hockey player Alexander Ovechkin where some kid wrote on a hockey message board following a game where Ovechkin scored against his team that he was going to kill Ovechkin. As I recall, the police did investigate that as a death threat and it was some 15 year old kid that made some weeping apology about how he was sorry and didn't really mean it. I tend to think most of those types of comments are exactly like that.

Personally, I don't think it can be ignored that Matt and the Roloffs have a tendency to exaggerate things for attention. Especially for things that make them out to be victims and sympathetic figures. Case in point, Matt has been posting on Facebook for years alluding to how Molly had a stalker - but he never really gave details.

However, during the Roloffs lawsuit vs Washington County over the trespassing safety inspector - the Roloffs were suing for $250,000 claiming Amy suffered severe emotional distress. The Roloffs were trying to prove that they have a heightened sense of safety because of the fame from the television show. They were trying to prove that's why Amy seeing a County inspector on her property would "freak her out" to the point that she needs $250,000 to compensate her - because of the issues they experience with threats and trespassing.

So under oath - where they faced the penalty of perjury - they were asked to describe these incidents. I find it very revealing that Matt and Amy never mentioned a "Molly stalker" in detail when it came down to the "nitty gritty". It's one thing to say something happened on your own Facebook or in a "fluff" interview where the person interviewing you won't ask any follow up questions, but it's another to talk about it when you are under oath and cannot lie or exaggerate the truth.

By the way, the incidents the Roloffs did talk about mainly involved over-zealous fans. People that drove to the Farm only to find out it was closed, but they drove past the old gate anyway hoping to see the Roloffs. Or a mountain biker that was riding through the woods and went too far onto the Roloffs property. Amy told him to go away and he did. Amy also described an incident during one of the remodels when the house had no windows or doors. Amy and Zach came home and heard someone inside. They didn't call the police. They shouted stuff like "Hey, what are you doing?" and Amy said they saw a boy and a girl run away. They apparently never called the police. Also in the court documents, there was a "weirdo" that was discussed. He was apparently a "doomsday" crazy, that sent the Roloffs things about how the world would end and he would protect them or something. But I believe the documents said it was determined that he's never been to the Roloff property and isn't from Oregon.

Anyhow, I tend to think the Roloffs are trying to exaggerate threats to hop on over to another issue that clearly bothers them - and that is the rights of others to criticize them as public figures.

Speaking of privacy and threats, let's not forget that the Roloffs tried and failed to issue a subpoena of the Spiritswander Blog for all the personal information of myself and *anyone* that has ever posted a comment. I also received threats from a person vowing to "hunt me down". That anonymous person claimed to be close Roloff family friend and former Little People, Big World producer Chris Cardamone, although there certainly is nothing to say that it was him. It was just anonymous comments claiming it was him and sending vitriolic messages.

So when the Roloffs start to say in the KATU article that "She (Amy) said she'd like to have those responsible for the threats exposed. "What I'd like to see happen is that you can't hide behind Facebook or emails or any electronic stuff," she said." I wonder if they're trying to use a more dramatic issue of "death threats" to carry over to the issue that clearly bothers the Roloffs - and that is the right that people have to criticize them.

And while I don't necessarily subscribe to the theory that a person should let a few "bad seeds" stop them from living the life they want, I do think it is somewhat odd that people who are supposedly terrified of these threats and fear crazy people, that they continue to do all they can to keep themselves in the public spotlight. If I was terrified that someone was going to harm me as Amy states when she talks about worrying if someone is on her property, I don't think I would invite thousands of strangers onto my property every October, even if I was making money off of it. As our frequent contributor Rap541, often points out, the Roloffs will give a private tour to anybody who is willing to pay them $300 for 30 minutes. If I was as frightened as the Roloffs claim they are, I don't think I would be inviting everybody with $300 to have a private tour.



19 comments:

Carol said...

Jeez, how many times has Matt said he has contacted the FBI about something?

They might have a case against him for harassment. Get over yourself Roloffs.

They're such drama queens.

Rap541 said...

Yes, despite the danger, the Golden Pass tours are still being offered on the Roloff website.

If they're getting phone calls, have they contacted the landline folks for tracing? Contacted the cell company to trace the calls? Its interesting in that video interview that they don't mention reporting the threats to facebook, which I would do.

But yeah, considering that they call two kids wandering around the house when it was completely open to the elements and can't remember if they ever called the cops, an "invasion of their home" when they describe it as an incident that has them fearful, yeah, sometimes I think they overexaggerate. Hopefully that doesn't end up working against them.

Ray said...

I'm glad I don't live in Oregon. How much of the taxpayer time and money do the Roloffs waste???

ME ME ME! We are important! So self absorbed!

Greg said...

More Roloff attention getting.

Jason said...

Give me a break. They want to be career reality tv star celebrities and then whine if they get attention. People writing stupid things about people on tv is nothing new.

If there was anything to it, I'm sure the police would be on it.

The Roloffs just can't resist painting themselves as victims.

Podge/Rodge groupie said...

I read Matt's FB post, and got a sort of twisted uneasiness about some things he wrote. His use of the phrase "We just read their sick and disgusting attempts to garner attention and build their self worth." and my personal favorite "Do not speak hate in return or you will become like them."
Uh, OK. There are not enough hours in the day to detail all of Matt's attempts to garner attention and increase his self worth. Not near enough. Just an odd choice of phrase?
After an unplanned (I'm guessing) pregnancy close to the family, Matt's FB post describing how he taught Jacob to use a condom using a banana, was refuted and Matt claimed he was "hacked" and he was exploring his options. When he makes these disgusting attempts to clean up things that he guessed wrongly would be well-received by his sheep (ya think?) how can we even think of taking him seriously now?
Another point that makes me uneasy is the writing of the threats detailed in the article. "U r all stoopid. Die." It's no secret that Matt is a horrible speller. Despite his claim of expertise when SAP Amercia rated him, what, 54th out of 54 System Engineers? Doh. Even family members have made public the fact that he asks for help spelling words at an elementary grade level, or slightly lower.
My final point is my own confusion at one simple idea. I know it's just the way I see things, but why would anybody threaten the Roloffs? Like, let's get a grip on reality here, people. What's the point? There is nothing to be gained from getting anything from a two-bit reality whore family that few people know about (1MM viewers per "special? Come on!) and even less people CARE about? Is it really worth the effort to threaten this family that Matt and Amy are claiming? Was is the basis? What is to be gained? Let's look back. Patty Hearst was kidnapped by the SLA. William Randolph Hearst was worth a helluva lot more than Matt Roloff (who?). I just don't see Matt as that important, that wealthy, or that influencial to be the subject of what he is claiming, but it sure LOOKS bad, doesn't it?

Vic Rattlehead said...

If they're getting telephone death threats there are three things they can do that should put a stop to it:
(A): Change their personal phone number.
(B): Go unlisted.
(C): Get caller ID.

They could even dump their land line and just go cellular because cell phone numbers aren't published in a telephone directory.

The other option is: STOP BEING ATTENTION WHORES and let TLC cancel them finally for good.

Mike P. said...

You'll have to forgive both my skepticism and my outright guffaw as I read this nonsense.

This has all the credibility of Matt's collapse to his office floor at the end of season four.

And all the dramatic nuance of a Perils of Pauline cliff-hanger written to alarm children. Children.

These charmless, grifting frauds continue to insert themselves unasked into public view, to waste the time and resources of public agencies, to twist arms and wring new sympathy and worry from a very stupid and very small remaining audience. It's their single skill.

I don't for a moment doubt that someone wrote those things, and did it on Facebook. But the problem is, that that fact erases all mystery. To claim that a genuine threat can "hide behind" Facebook, a firewall so effective that no one, not even authorities, can penetrate it to discover a poster's identity, is to make a thigh-slapping whopper.

And the mysterious car-in-the night, seen and chased only by Matt (who didn't manage to get a license number) and lost by bungling deputies, indifferent to Matt's health and safety -- what can one say?

I for one can say that I was more worried about Rocky's whereabouts than I am about this claptrap. And even then, I knew I was being suckered.

Timothy said...

Mike P., my thoughts exactly.

Megan said...

The Roloffs are the biggest attention hogs going.

They just NEED to have attention to make themselves feel important.

Dave said...

Your 15 minutes of fame are up, Matt.

Please hang up the phone so someone else can use the line.

Podge/Rodge groupie said...

This reminds me of Sir A.C. Doyles "The Norwood Builder". The builder would have gotten away with the perfect crime if he had not climbed out of hidey-hole in the night and left a new thumb print, and thus got more attention, on the stairway wall. This did not fool Sherlock Holmes, who knew the print was not there before.
This is Matt's dilemma. Even once mentioning these threats is giving the criminals (if there are any) EXACTLY what they want. The attention of the people. However, if the Roloffs do the right thing, keep everything out of the public eye. quiet and under the radar, then perhaps the investigative bodies would have a much more free hand to find these criminals if they exist. The two schools of thought are these:
1: If Matt blows things open so far as to claim "have caused us to engage multiple authorities and agencies at several levels." he might as well name them to prove they are not fictitious statements because they have lost all effectiveness anyway, and
2: Matt the master of spin is 'teasing' us, like he has pointed out previously on FB he loves to do, and his delusions of grandeur and self-importance have reached new levels, high or low depending on your point of view.

David said...

Just more lame attention seeking.

Christine said...

What I think?

I think a lot of what the Roloffs complain about is that people can criticize them.

Since they come off as whiners that don't understand or accept any of the downsides that come with being a public figure that they want to be, they want to use something more dramatic and lump it all in together.

Yeah, I'm sure from time to time like anybody that puts themselves out in the public, that they get stupid messages, insults and hateful messages.

But it sure seems to me like they are trying to use that to say that all criticism they get is so wrong.

Here's the part that sticks out to me from that article or video.

It's when the article said "they get "attacks on their disabilities, the sexual orientation of their kids and even their Christianity." - that's a quote from the article.

"Attacks" as in criticism, that's what they really mean, right?

Are "attacks on their disabilities" people that say ignorant things about their dwarfism?

"Attacks on their sexual orientation of their kids"? They mean that some people think someone might be gay?

"Attacks on their Christianity"? Do they mean that people comment that they aren't good Christians or that they are hypocritical or judgmental?

Guess what, those aren't terrible threats. It's criticism that public figures receive and comes with the territory if you're going to market yourselves as public figures and throw yourself in the spotlight every chance you get.

Peter said...

Isn't it interesting how vague the details are in that article?

Did that reporter bother to ask any follow up questions?

Case in point, the author has a quote from Matt "My boy's girlfriend came in and was mortified," and then the author writes "She had received a threatening message on Facebook."

Why aren't they specific? What was the the "threatening message"? If it was a serious threat of harm, have they reported to Facebook? That seems like the simple solution.

But these are the Roloffs. Masters of exaggeration and attention seeking.

Was the "threatening" message a girlfriend received a criticism?

Sassenach said...

Just another desperate attempt to keep their fading name(fame) alive.

Karl said...

Attacks on their Christianity? So what? I don't think the Roloffs are "bad Christians". From my experience and my impression of the Roloffs, they are typical.

The majority of Christians I know are unkind, selfish, and hypocritical. They use the "scripture" to reassure themselves that they are awesome.

BeckyM said...

Christine's comment - WORD

M said...

If this is true then I hope they do catch whoever has been threatening them.

Thinking outloud but can't they fence in their entire land? They have money can't they have like sensors put in?