Where is Australian Protective Mom Cassie Watter & the Twins?


These two identical twin daughters were kidnapped in April 2014 by their non-custodial mother Catherine “Cassie” Watter. This case was featured on May 18, 2014 on the website of Family Court Critic / Protective Parent Movement Safe Kids International run by Cindy Dumas of California. Dumas used the title: “Run Cassie Run!!” and labeled Cassie Watter as a Protective Mom. Watter was the former director of a paediatric health service in Townsville, Australia.


Cassie Watter – Parental Kidnapper


Alleged Sighting of Cassie Watter in Queensland’s North Coast

Editor’s Note:

  • Savanna Todd / Samantha Geldenhuys the daughter of Dorothy Lee Barnett is a nursing student at James Cook University in Townsville, Australia. By some strange coincidence, that is the city in which Cassie Watter abducted her two daughters. We wonder if Cassie Watter knew Dorothy Lee Barnett or any of the Barnett’s supporters?

9 Responses to Where is Australian Protective Mom Cassie Watter & the Twins?

  1. Gary says:

    Michael Watter says he dropped his girls off at school and they walked into the school with their ‘friends’. No one saw the girls and no one saw cassie hanging around the school waiting to ‘abduct’ the girls. No one saw her car being dumped with keys in the ignition and the girls school bags and clothes left behind. After 3 years of ‘leads’, every one has lead no where. Surely the only possibility is they are still exactly where they were left 3 years ago. They were murdered plain and simple.

    • underwatch says:

      Gary, in other cases left-behind family members of the alleged kidnapper will try and claim murder. There is research indicating that in 75% of the cases, the parental kidnapper’s family members know the hiding location of the kidnapper and the children. Last year, we saw one of the first prosecutions of third parties (Dede Evavold, Gina and Doug Dahlen). Many of us in the Family Abduction Community would like to see prosecutions for obstruction of Justice. Hopefully in the Kristy Brooks case, we will see others charged. In Australia, I understand the media is not allowed to publish photos of children involved in divorces. It’s not surprising that Dorothy Barnett was able to hide in Australia for 20 years. Eventually when Cassie is found, I hope that she spends a year in prison for every year she kidnapped her children.

    • forthelost says:

      If her family really had no idea where she was and suspected she and the kids had been murdered, wouldn’t they be crying foul and demanding an investigation instead of just making vague remarks about how good a mother she is?

  2. Mary Johnson says:

    Dear Undergroundwatch,

    Thank you for still operating this website.
    It is important that general public remains informed about, amongst others, underground movements and false accusations of abuse in custody cases.
    Yet, I still deem it possible that it can happen in very exceptional circumstances that an abductor has to protect the child and has indeed no other option than to go underground. However, such cases are absolutely not as frequent in North-America, Europe, Australia and New Zealand as their supporters would let us believe.

    On 5 May 2018 it was revealed that after four years the parental abducted Watter twins have been located and have been returned to their now former left-behind father.
    Yet, the case is far from over since the maternal grandparents, who claimed to not have spoken with the abductor for more than four years, are seeking custody.
    Besides, it is also mentioned in several articles that the Crime and Misconduct Commission stated in March 2016 that the police investigation concerning the children’s abuse requested by the abductor had been inadequate and unprofessional. Yet, it seems that said finding had no repercussions for the courts’ outcome that custody should be given to the now former left-behind parent.
    For more information see:

    What might interest you is that also in Australia underground networks are on the rise. The same arguments used by supporters of United States’ underground movements can be found as that the family court system is corrupt and that the abductor is genuinely desperate to save the child from abuse, otherwise he or she would not result to such a drastic measure.
    According to an article in the Australian Courier Mail of 23 August 2018, since more parents are disappearing with their children, the family court system has made it available for left-behind parent’s to fill out forms when their partner has disappeared with the child (publication order).
    For more information see:
    Such a trend is worrying. I do not understand why such organizations are becoming more popular these days. Especially, since children’s rights have become more recognized by courts and lots of attention is being paid to the topic of domestic violence.

    I sincerely hope (unfortunately) that this website will remain active for many years to come since in my opinion too many international parental abductors are receiving undeservedly support and such cases should not be ignored.

    Best regards, Mary

  3. underwatch says:

    Mary, thanks for letting us know. We apologize for missing this protective parent case in Australia.

    We cannot believe the support that this case is getting in Australia. Cassie Watter’s case appears to us as a copy cat of some of the American Protective Parent Cases. We would like to see law enforcement make other arrests in this case.

    The Editor

  4. underwatch says:

    Mary, does Australia have an organization similar to America’s National Center for Missing and Exploited Children?

  5. Mary says:

    Dear Undergroundwatch,

    Thank you for your reactions.

    Australia’s position concerning publishing information of parental abducted children is strict because left-behind parents have to request and receive the court’s permission before bringing attention to the missing child in the media.

    At the moment, I am not aware if Australia has a similar organization as the National Center for Missing and Exploited Children.
    To my understanding, there are two places where missing parental abducted children are published, namely on the Family Court’s website (http://www.familycourt.gov.au/wps/wcm/connect/fcoaweb/family-law-matters/missing-children) and on the website of the Australian Federal Police (https://missingpersons.gov.au/).
    However, not all children who are registered as being parental abducted are found on the last mentioned website, thus, I would rather check the Family Court’s website for actual cases.
    To make things more complicated, the website of the International Centre for Missing and Exploited Children (http://globalmissingkids.org), which is affiliated with the National Center for Missing and Exploited Children, profiles 23 missing children from Australia, and only one of them (Miriam Ortega-Álvarez) concerns a parental abducted child. However, she is not listed on the website of the Australian Federal Police (while the others are), yet I believe that there is a valid reason as to why her case is mentioned by said Centre. Moreover, the parental abducted children who are featured on the websites of the Family Court and the Australian Federal Police are not mentioned on the Centre’s website. Thus, the cooperation between the three of them raises questions.

    Thank you for bringing attention to Australia’s underground movements.
    Currently, your website is only one of the few which pays attention to this subject.
    Keep up the good work of informing the general public!

    Best regards, Mary

  6. Veronica parker says:

    So when do we hear the voices of the children? How many 7 year olds do you know with an STI from being sexually assaulted in their father’s care? How many people has Watter got on his payroll? He’s not innocent and the children need to be listened to and acknowledged. How do you account for records and reports being ignored or changed? A 10,000 page brief and solicitors can’t handle it because the abuse outlined is too much for them to deal with.
    The real story will come out and Watter will be left with egg on his face.

    Yes Cassie is guilty of taking the children, but when people don’t listen, a parent will protect in any way possible.

    Is it fair to have a parent standing over children saying, don’t mention this, don’t talk about that, don’t talk about home, don’t mention school, your time is up, get off the call? How is that healthy for children?

    For the children’s sake, I hope they are listened to now.

    • underwatch says:


      1. What a horrible choice Cassie made to kidnap her children. If she had concerns about the welfare if her children coparenting with her former spouse, she had many other legal alternatives in Australia. The money spent by her and third parties could have gone toward therapy for her children so they could be monitored by a professional and licensed therapist.

      2. The 10,000 page brief of allegations in protective parent cases are by Cassie’s friends, other parents and caretakers rather than un-bias and independent licensed professionals. Protective Parents are coached to fabricate disclosures and even medical conditions — possibly a variant of Muchausen’s Syndrome by Proxy. Many Protective Moms will inaccurately observe their child or children’s behavior after a custody exchange and wrongfully interpret it. According to researchers, the accusing protective mom may react visibly to the child’s verbal statements and behaviors in a manner that might encourage the child to repeat these statements and behaviors to get attention. This was most likely the case with Cassie unless she outright fabricated the allegations.

      3. The allegation that Cassie’s former spouse has so many people (i.e, law enforcement, judges, child protection professionals) on his payroll is ignorant and myopic.

      4. Abducting protective moms like Cassie Watter (Aleidria Lichau, Joanne McDowell, Sandra Grazzini) likely deny and dismiss the other parent’s value to the child (even after having a child or multiple children with them.) Abducting parents believe that they, more than anyone else, know what is best for their child; they cannot see how, or even why, they should share parenting with their ex-partner.

      5. Most custody violators do not consider their actions illegal or morally wrong, even after the involvement of law enforcement.

      For Cassie Doubleday, what would have been so bad about joint custody and coparenting vs supervised custody time? Protective Non-Custodial Moms like to blame the Family Law Courts but in this case, it is obvious the courts got it right “in the best interests of the children”.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: