State of Utah v. Michelle Wolferts


Michelle Woferts – Parental Kidnapping is Abuse

It is commonly said that one of the most severe forms of Domestic Violence is kidnapping your children. That’s what Michelle Wolferts being criminally prosecuted for. With the parental kidnapping, there is also parental alienation. It’s easy to surmise that Michelle Wolferts did not and does not have kind words to say about the children’s father — just check the Internet.

On May 5, 2016, in the 4th District Court, American Fork Department Family Court Judge Christine Johnson ruled to keep the Wolferts teenagers in Kansas with their custodial father. As is common in these cases, the court ordered an evaluation. The Special Master Sandra Dredge was ordered to provide the court with the name of the potential neutral evaluator. As also expected, the protective parent will attempt to insert a non-neutral member of the protective parent network to perform an evaluation. After a parental kidnapping with a criminal trial also moving forward, the Family Court is tasked with reunifying the parental kidnapper with her children.

In the course of the proceedings, Michelle Wolfert’s Attorney Kathleen McConkie represented that Michelle Wolfert’s knew she was wrong by kidnapping her children. This is shocking since Michelle Wolferts has plead not guilty for those criminal charges. McConkie, the protective parent attorney asked the court to remove the children from the custodial parent’s home, but could cite no Utah Law or legal basis to the judge to do so.

There was also a motion to replace the children’s Guardian ad Litem attorney Kacy Borlik. In a case like this, Ms. Borlik is no doubt be pressured by the local protective parent community to rule for mother.

Finally, a neutral party would need to be selected to supervise the visitation with Michelle Wolferts and her children. Of course Michelle Wolferts did not have a named neutral and trained third party setup to do the supervised visitation. This is also common, the protective parent typically wants her non-neutral party to do the supervision.

Editor’s Note: The GAL Attorney represented that these teenagers were not allowed to use the Internet other than for their school work. With the daily postings by Michelle Wolferts and her supporters, why wouldn’t this be in the best interest of these children?


52 Responses to State of Utah v. Michelle Wolferts

  1. Wow, the girls should have a right to speak regardless if Mom has supporters or not.

    • underwatch says:

      These are teenagers that should be focused on their education and teenager activities. They don’t need their photos and stories plastered on the Internet so their mother and sister can appear on the Jerry Springer or another TV Talk Show. Madonna’s son Rocco Ritchie wanted his privacy. The parents are working toward coparenting and an appropriate custody schedule to meet their son’s best interests. Both Michelle Wolferts and Brittany have been charged with criminal acts. It sounds like you are minimizing those alleged crimes. Again as this story unfolds, the issues brought up by Team Michelle and Brittany are certainly lacking in credibility and it sounds like both the Family Law Court and the Criminal Court are discovering that. The girls will soon be 18 and it’s time for Team Michelle & Brittany to move forward with their lives.

      • Just her says:

        Brittany’s crime was living in her moms apartment for a bit? She was a very young woman who had been through major trauma and had been extremely sheltered by her father. You think she is a criminal as you are portraying her to be?
        And the reference to the show? Is that the Dr. Phil show? Yeah. Brian was on that show also. In fact it was that show that made me cross over to whom I thought was the abuser. It changed very quickly to Brian.

      • underwatch says:

        It is surprising that Brittany has not also been charged with child concealment. It is sad to see Brittany think that she had a license to engage in perjury to gain access to government assistance for housing. That doesn’t seem like a young adult with any moral character.

  2. KeepThemSafe says:

    1. Michelle Wolferts is not on the Internet. She is too busy replying to frivolous filings from Brain. Get an x change account and check for yourself.

    2. The court ruled on April 13, to have the girls removed to a 3rd party home to follow the transition plan that was ruled by the requisition hearing. It was brought to the Judges attention that Brian conveniently left out the DCFS findings of abuse. Brian, Bishop and Jocylyn Parish, denied the Gal confidentail contact with her clients. To which, the Gal had the file an urgent hearing. Interesting the therapist has NEVER seen then alone, and was never told the Gal was ordered to speak to the girls. An evaluation was ordered from the hearing on the 13th.

    3. The two day hearing on May 4 and 5th. First you hear how Brian didn’t follow the court order. (Which if you were any blogger that did your research you would know this is normal for him) I suggest anyone who has not listened to the hearings, they are on youtube. Thank goodness for them or else you might believe this crap.

    4. The Special Master, Gal and the Judge suggested the girls stay in a neutral family friend home. Brian wouldn’t allow that. He needs his civil rights. What about the girl’s civil rights? What about all the times he said he would give them a voice? What happened to that? Oh thats right, control.

    5. You should point out that Sydney and Dani were told the tro was still in place. They were told that nothing trumps HRTR protocol. All lies. They want the truth out. They will take a lie detector test. They knew they would suffer repercussions for speaking the truth. They were told NOT to take an evaluation. They want to take one. And had to say, things were getting better at home to protect themselves. Interesting you left out they were roughed up and extremely traumatized by the HRTR.

    6. Michelle never has said she kidnapped the girls. In fact, the Gal stated the girls told her a number of times their mother wanted them to return. They did not want to endure the abuse from their father any longer. They ran away.

    7. Judge Johnson was fully aware that there is NO case law to remove the children from the father’s home unless child protective services is involved. That was a set up considering she said they would not discuss the other filings and this was ONLY about the Gals urgent hearing.

    8. Since the tro hearing Michelle has tried to have supervised visitation and they keep blocking it. It wasn’t til the hearing on the 5th that they stated it needs to be a Kansas person. But notice how the Judge is fine with it being the Haddocks if they are cleared. Why are you not mentioning how Brian keeps denying any free supervisors? Even thechurch BISHOP tried. Funny Michelle never fought for him to not have a free one back when his visits were supervised.

    9. The ONLY voice the girls have ever had in 14 years was Kacy Borlik. She was someone they trusted. Interesting the abuser fought to silence her too.

    10. If your gonna blog, get your facts straight. Your misleading and out right lying.

    • underwatch says:

      As this Teenager Family Abduction story unfolds, the only “Abuser” in this case is Michelle Wolferts. A Family Abduction is considered to be one of the cruelest forms of child maltreatment. The emotional abuse and alienation inflicted on these girls by Michelle Wolferts is egregious. If you listen to audio in the last hearing, her attorney says that Michelle knows what she did was wrong. These girls didn’t runaway, they were kidnapped in this Teenager Family Abduction. Why can’t Michelle stop fighting with her remarried former spouse? The protective mom in these cases always seem to have very similar personalities. The protective parent network prides themselves in finding cause-oriented professionals like Kacy Borlik. It is surprising that there isn’t a large number of professional complaints against. On the other hand it sounds like the current judge in Utah understands the case.

      • Wolfertscase says:

        Again she has not been found guilty of anything!! And requardless of mom or dad, WHAT ABOUT THE GIRLS WHO HAVE BEEN THROUGH HELL FROM THE COURT ABUSE? Kacy Borlik had the girls best interest fully. She is a hero who was silenced by a lair. Why don’t you count how many times Brian promised to let the girls have a voice? It doesn’t matter really. When they turn 18 they won’t want anything to do with him. He made his choice. You can’t control humans without them wanting to fight back for freedom.

      • Just her says:

        I believe you are confused. I believe she meant that she knew she was breaking the law and that was wrong but I don’t believe she felt that helping and protecting her children was wrong.
        Again like stated before, I don’t know Michelle except from doing research and listening to what she has said in interviews to news reporters.

      • underwatch says:

        In past criminal trials I don’t recollect reading interviews given by the defendant admitting he or she was wrong. That sounds like an admission of guilt.

      • Wolfertscase,
        If Brittney wants to stop the attacks on her character then tell her to stop leaking sensitive documents on her blog.

      • Letthemspeak says:

        Hey so you are well aware her charges where dismissed. The girls were kidnapped by Dorcy and their dad. And who had dr. Phil filming the girls getting off the airplane while with transporters. Brian.

      • underwatch says:

        Just because Michelle was not charged does not mean she didn’t commit the crime. There are a number of parental kidnappers that were not prosecuted but after the kidnapping still had supervised visitation. In Michelle’s case because the father moved to a different state, it’s not shocking that the local prosecutor didn’t want the county to incur the expense of a trial. It would also give Michelle another forum. Let’s hope these girls go off to college and this situation de-escalates. Michelle’s supporters should also delete the personal information of the girls from their websites. The older daughter needs to ensure she does not repeat the cycle of false allegations and civil disobedience.

  3. Amy Mott says:

    Underwatch- You really need to report correct information. Why don’t you listen to the Court Audio Transcripts or better yet attend one of the many hearings! I believe reporting false information opens you up to many lawsuits. I would tread lightly. One should remember the “Real Truth” is always far more interesting than lies. Especially, the ones you continue to put out.

  4. Cecilia Sparks says:

    Wow, I hope the blogger and all the persons involved in silencing these girls and punishing both them and their mother get their reservations to Hell soon. If you do not live by the truth in this life, you will certainly live by the sword in the next life. The sadness is that you, and the monsters who seek destruction of good human beings, have no rights in this life to hurt all the people you hurt. Enjoy your afterlife. I don’t think God is quick to forgive you at the moment of your passing, when you have shown no remorse, and you knowingly perpetrated lies in this blog and publicly. As adults, these girls WILL expose the truth. At that point you will be helpless to stop them.

    • The only monster in this case was mom. Clearly Sydney and Danielle were brainwashed by their mother, In case you didn’t know they were reading from a script.
      Britney Wolferts should be charged as a co-conspiritor simply because she knew where her sisters were.

  5. This is blog is has not content of truth in it. It’s run by a Hagerman or Barrow type that has only one agenda…to propagate lies to support abusers that want and need control. Your comments are as delusional as the pedophile, abusive man you support here. Why have you made your blog about berating Michelle and those that support the girls and helping the girls? Why are you so afraid of teenage girls getting the help and support they need to be safe and to be heard? Abusers must control unfortunately.

  6. This is blog is has no content of truth in it. It’s run by a Hagerman or Barrow type that has only one agenda…to propagate lies to support abusers that want and need control. Your comments are as delusional as the pedophile, abusive man you support here. Why have you made your blog about berating Michelle and those that support the girls and helping the girls? Why are you so afraid of teenage girls getting the help and support they need to be safe and to be heard? Abusers must control unfortunately.

    • underwatch says:

      She kidnapped her children. She had other legal remedies. We want to see her punished with the maximum felony sentence to deter others from engaging in this crime.

      • Just her says:

        What if you are mistaken? What if the girls are correct with everything they say?

      • underwatch says:

        As we have said before in these family abduction trials, the defendant never fully exhausts her legal alternatives before deciding to break the law and kidnap her child. The motive is usually anger and revenge toward her former spouse rather than the protection of her children.

  7. Angel wings says:

    Once again another misguided attempt to derail the truth. Since its so common in cases like this to have evaluations done why is it that the father and his council have and continue to everything to keep an evaluation from happening? According to the AUDIO of the court hearing this was ordered on April 13th, it’s now May 20th and STILL this has not happened. Just because a person admits that the choices they made weren’t the best or perhaps were “wrong” does not indicate that they are admitting to what you claim here, did she have other choices? Maybe, MAYBE NOT, from where I sit and how I see this continuing to unfold, this mother and her girls have been through Hell with this man and his control, lis and tactics. According to the recording the girls are BEGGING for an evaluation, for polygraphs, to be able to tell the truth, and yet their father is silencing them. I suggest to anyone who wants the TRUTH in this case to look deeper, listen to the court recordings, read the expert statements, unfortunately many of those in positions to serve and protect are CORRUPT. No one wants these girls to speak for they will leak the truth. I say give the evsls, do polygraphs LET’S GET TO THE TRUTH.

    • underwatch says:

      Michelle Wolferts should not have engaged in a Teenager Family Abduction. You show no empathy for the plight of searching parents and their kidnapped children. This case has less to do about teenager emancipation and more to do with parental kidnapping and alienation. Do you think the kidnapped children were victims of this crime?

  8. Still Undecided says:

    Let’s be fair

    Regardless of your opinion on the GAL, the judge chose not to appoint an ongoing GAL because according to Utah Law, the statutory requirements were not met. The law is the law is the law. No lying required.

    The last audio hearing clearly stated that the girls are to be removed * for the evaluation* because there is no statutory reason for them to be removed from their living situation at this time. Utah DCS has closed the emotional abuse cases against both mother and father, therefore indicating to the judge that DCS does not believe there to be *evidence* that they are in physical danger. What else was the judge supposed to do? Judicial discretion doesn’t overcome statutory rules.

    Regardless of what the girls have said, courts operate on evidence, and on what is going on AT THAT TIME. Is this fair? Maybe not. But that is how the court system works. Sometimes multiple investigations line up nicely and sometimes they don’t (ie the custody
    and criminal proceedings) This is not some grand conspiracy.

    The GAL and mother’s attorney wanted the evaluation done in Utah (audio hearing). Special Master intervened and said it should be done in KS by someone who *specializes in reunification* so that the evaluation is done by someone with experience (seems reasonable) who can continue on as the girls’ therapist (also seems reasonable). Having someone in Utah makes no sense, unless your goal is to disrupt their lives, bring them to back Utah or spend a fortune on airfare.

    The girls complaint that they are never alone…if it were my kids and they had been missing for 18 months I wouldn’t let them be alone either. I’d be terrified they would disappear again–whether they had run away, or been taken. Yes yes I’m sure an abuser would want to control them. But so would a normal (non abusive) parent in these circumstances. This in and of itself is not indicative of abusive behavior.

    As for the supervision of contact. Michelle should have supervised contact with the girls. Period. But it is also fair to expect that the person supervising the contact is trained and has no other responsibility in the case. Otherwise how do they know what is acceptable and they should only be focused on the communication?

    Sadly courts are slow moving. Otherwise it wouldn’t take two years to get divorced sometimes.

    • Margo/Mom says:

      Thank you for the balance, Still. I have had a difficult time following this case. The two-state realities are a challenge, and frankly, the “news” has all been orchestrated out of Utah.

      Dr. Craig Childress has taken to using the term “Flying Monkeys” (actually he didn’t coin the term–just uses it according to a popular definition to refer to those who toady to and carry out the aims of narcissists) for this gaggle of individuals who have taken to combing the internet for news and opinions on some of these high-conflict custody cases. I recognize a few who have posted here. Sadly they have the capability of sucking the air out of a room–or a blog–so that rational discussion becomes impossible.

      The Wolferts case is less clear to me than some others for multiple reasons. However it is quite clear to me that regardless of what name one gives to the disappearance of these two girls for 18 months (running away or abduction), their mother knew where they were, that they were missing and provided them with shelter, etc and willfully failed to inform any authorities that were looking for them. She has stated this pretty openly in interviews, claiming that the girls “needed” this “break.” We have laws and protective agencies in this country for reasons. Clearly any system run by humans is fallible. But frankly I never see on the part of the cacophony of anti-family-court agitators any concern for children at large that might lead us toward more comprehensive systems of protection, for instance, or more supportive resources for families. Their concerns are not, for instance, for a single mother who loses custody because she failed to secure adequate child care so that she can work. They are nowhere to be found in any fight to expand access to addiction or mental health services that might prevent the break-up of families–or support reunification of children removed to foster care. In fact they seem to be wholly oblivious to any actual systemic considerations. Rather they intercede in high-profile, high-conflict (frequently high-income) divorce cases in which they can pit one parent against the other, frankly claiming that Moms are safe and Dads and dangerous.

      Again–thanks for stepping in.

      • Still Undecided says:

        Thank you for the rational opinion.

        I am not going to pretend to know what happens in those girls home. However, what their mother did is illegal, whether she took them, or simply concealed them. Clearly, other options were available to her and she chose to ignore the law. (the sister could have filed her alleged audio tapes years ago–she has been out of his home for years. She could have reinvolved DCS, she could have sued for custody again) Yes the process is slow and frustrating. All she did was teach her children that it is ok to ignore and disrespect the law if you don’t like it.

        I agree that the courts should work better, and that the anti family court crowd would do better to focus on more run of the mill cases. I have friends who have had truly ugly custody fights, and some with non-fights. Some with great judges and some who didn’t seem to read the case file. Mental health support, arbitration, reunification after beating addiction, co-parenting classes/requirements etc are all things that should be addressed, and would help far more children than one sensationalized case.

        The courts aren’t perfect. But everyone should take a deep breath and pay attention to what the law actually says, and bear in mind that judges, GALs, special masters etc are all human, and they all see far more horrible things than any of us realize. They listen to ‘he said, she said’ all day long. Why should they just take someone’s word? What is a crisis emergency for one family may just not seem that bad in the broad spectrum of ugliness they see. That isn’t to discount the crisis–but some perspective seems to be in order.

        Putting down your kids and being harsh doesn’t really compare to the kid whose parents put out cigarettes on their arm and don’t feed them. Both things are wrong and shouldn’t happen but comparatively speaking….

    • wolftertscase says:

      Wrong. Only juvenile court could have used a law to remove. Judge Johnson knew that was a trick question. Interesting the kansas DCF closed their case Jan 28th. The requisition wasn’t even filed til feb 18. There is alot more about thise case that has not been released. The truth will be shown soon..

  9. Wewillneverstopfighting says:

    These girls are 15 and almost 17 years old. Sydney will be 18 in just a little over a year? She’ll be able to leave and tell their story. When that happens and there are TWO Wolferts sisters telling the same story are you still going to discount their abuse claims? Will you do to Sydney what you did to Brittney and call her brainwashed, alienated, a liar, drama queen? These young women are not idiots, in fact they’re actually quite intelligent. You’d know this if you paid more attention to THEM then you do their mother. If you actually checked your need to be right at the door, you’d see these 2 human beings are perfectly capable of telling you how they’re feeling, what they’re thinking, why they ran away, why their mom was with them, how they’d like to move forward, which state they’d like to live in, etc. Why can’t they do that? Why are they competent enough to operate a motor vehicle but not competent enough to speak freely? Why does their dad and Angie keep them silenced? They’re not young children, they’re young women and they matter.
    Like someone said above “the courts are slow moving.” So basically the only thing Brian and Angie are going to be able to accomplish is 1. Alienating their children 2. Racking up legal fees they or someone else will be paying on for quite sometime and 3. Giving them more and more to talk about when they’re finally free of the court system. It sucks and makes me sick to think about what these young women are going through but these young women are clearly strong, what’s another year, huh? Time is something you just can’t control Mr. Wolferts. When 18 starts knocking at the door and you realize it’s the last time you’ll ever see her, I hope “winning” and crucifying Michelle and Brittney still means as much to you in that moment as it does now.

  10. cnkrush says:

    I understand that there are opposing sides here… very strong opposition…. But I do not understand the incessant attacks. Even more baffling is why the “side” doing all of the attacking constantly blames Brian Wolferts for the attacking. (Now that we’re clear on whose side I am almost entirely on, I will get to the point).

    Below is a post cut and pasted from the Understanding Michelle Facebook page. We only make it to the second sentence of the first full paragraph before we find a perfect example of what I am talking about. Michelle Wolferts, Brittany Wolferts, Lisa Soderlund, Eric Soderlund and Jeanine A Thriver/Jeanine Peel take real phrases from actual spoken or written words and clip them down to fit a meaning with a convenient connotation that usually, from what I have seen anyway, is not the way that it was originally used or meant to be used or they stamp out their own definition without any regard to the lack of accuracy. They have taken situations in medical reports (even those that they KNOW have clear issues with objectivity or relevance or how/why they were brought to light) and decided that the doctor meant X when in fact the report doesn’t state the information nearly as clear and concisely as they’d have you believe. They also used the written reports of a psychologist whose reports, frankly, seem lacking, negligent, biased and overly personal were presented to the court as though he is their treating psychologist (from what I could see) yet didn’t reveal to the court that at the time he wrote it and presented to the court he’d had a 10 year long personal relationship with the mother. He also writes in one report to the court (again, to my knowledge he doesn’t divulge the close relationship) he explains that the reason the report on Michelle is so short is because of her incredible mental health. Wait, what? REALLY? That is NOT scientific or detailed and gives no information by which any conclusion should be drawn except his fitness as a therapist. (Think that might be why he didn’t come looking you up, Michelle?)

    They repeatedly use the phrase that Brian had succeeded on “a technicality” though the lawyer in the group should understand that legal maneuverings ARE technicalities. I may not be using the correct legal verbiage here, but the general idea here is that they use social fears and whatnot to move their own agenda forward.
    They manipulate with ruthless lack of concern not only for the father but they release journal entries of the girls and Brittany is constantly attributing certain feelings and statements she wants taken as fact to the girls without any thought for the fallout. She has made HORRIBLE accusations against her father and even if she is correct, her story LITERALLY changes (documented by printouts of her blog) when the details don’t line up or the story didn’t seem juicy enough. There are complaints that Brian has called Brittany a liar. My parents called me a liar when I was younger…. BECAUSE I WAS LYING! So while not a great thing to be faced with, truth is an affirmative defense here. (Let’s also just admit that being called a liar is nothing compared to what she calls him).

    I heard about this case when it was on Dr Phil. I jumped online to look it up because I was curious. The first thing I saw was the sexual reports the mother’s side posted about the dad. Then I saw they were taking snippets and saying “He admitted xxx…..” I disagreed and the onslaught of attacks of all kinds began. I didn’t go calling and looking for a fight…. Just a discussion. They came out swinging. But when anyone swings back… omg the endless bitching and “poor me” begins.

    Outside of all THAT BS… they still want to argue about whether the girls ran or Michelle took them or whatever. Listen to the audio of May 4th and May 5th. Brian’s attorney states at approx. 8:55 mark that the mother’s own statements NOW admit that the girls ran but she would not disclose their location if they told her where they were. Ok so let’s assume this is believable… its not, but ok. Why did she leave her job with notice…. Why did she give notice she was giving up her apartment (which Brittany then took over)?
    Lastly- the whole reason I included their post below all of this was because of how they chose to spin ONE WORD. “Shelter.” They want us to believe that the journals were only redacted regarding the names of the kids in a SHELTER to protect them. ANY reasonable person can see the value in that. Even those on Brian’s side. The problem is this…. Do you see any difference, as this case is concerned, in the use of the word “shelters” versus “safe house?” I don’t know about you, but I see a big difference…. To me signaling intent, coordinated efforts… not just shelter. In the audio from the hearing the word “shelter” isn’t used… SAFE HOUSE is. And guess who used the word? Michelle Wolferts’ attorney. (approx. 26 min mark)

    Forgive me for how disjointed this is written. Its just frustrating to continue to read all the back and forth of how the girls aren’t being heard and how poor Michelle is a victim. BS… Michelle gives every appearance of a woman pissed off (and probably emotionally troubled) because she didn’t feel like she was enough for her husband because he was cheating. So instead of realizing his behavior is about him, not her, she decided to make him pay til her dying breath. No matter the cost. And in the process, she is victimizing true victims all over again… not to mention destroying her daughter’s lies.

    ~~~~From Facebook~~~~May 18 at 8:58am ·
    5-12-16 Brian filed a expedited motion for contempt and sanctions for destruction of evidence.
    We know the only evidence that Brian’s attorney was allowed to review, were the girls journals. We know the names of the children in the shelters were blocked out to keep them safe in the shelters. In fact, shelters have protection paperwork that you sign to not release the names of the members that are there.
    This leads me to believe that Brian has found the girls journals to be a voice that he is not happy with. We know the Gal had read the journals. She firmly stated she had tons of evidence of abuse.
    Is Brian now trying to silence the journals? Why would he care if names were protected that have NOTHING to do with the custody proceedings?
    Not to mention there are Utah rules of Civil Procedure.

    • wolftertscase says:

      Hey Crush. Very soon I will be releasing one audio. The rest are for something special. You will be eating your words. Brian has tried to brainwash the kids for years.

      Brain has filed sanctions and contempt for names scratched out of the journals from the shelters. Call any shelter and they will tell you, you have to sign a form promising to not release the names of the other abuse victims. (Google domestic violence safe house) same stuff as domestic violence shelters.

      I guess you missed the part where the GAL said the girls repeatedly would not return to the courts. After 14 years of court abuse by the system and continued emotional abuse by the dad, they would rather run or die.

      I can’t believe you just blamed his 30-40 affairs on Michelle. Actually I can, you live for drama. You don’t care about these girls. Let me guess it was her fault for being fired for sexual harassment? You watched Dr. Phil and made your opinion. I have read almost ever court filing since 2004. And crossed checked my evidence.

      The only thing that matters right now is that the girls are safe. Utah would have never released them if they didn’t know there was a transition plan to slowly transition them in his home. Which wasn’t followed.

      I will end with you watched Dr. Phil. There is no denying you have not read or studied the case.

      Forget mom, forget dad. LISTEN TO THE THREE GIRLS. Hey Crush how many times did Brian say he would give his girls a voice?? He said it on Dr. Phil, too. Why the silence now. Glad your watching the page. Just remember I state the facts. So when I say, he doesn’t like what’s in the journals, believe me.

      • Margo/Mom says:

        Court abuse? That is certainly an ill-defined (if not wholly undefined) accusation.

        Like many rational folks, I am not a whole-hearted supporter of Dad (nor necessarily opposed to him), but using this weird notion of “court abuse” to justify breaking the law is just flat-out pretzel logic.

  11. Still Undecided says:

    The reason I am still undecided is the following:
    1) The incessant use of the phrase “admitted pedophile”. This phrase began to pop up as soon as Dr Phil basically told Brittany that she needed, essentially, more serious accusations to justify herself because complaining about her cell phone and security cameras just wasn’t convincing. Despite this rather damaging “evaluation” at no time have any of the girls claimed to be molested. Just made “uncomfortable”. To my knowledge there has never been any arrest for pedophilic molestations etc, despite the very high profile of the case. You would think victims would be crawling out of the woodwork. However, yes, this is concerning.
    2) Dr Hyde. I was curious about him because of the reports mentioned above me. After watching his nearly tearful youtube video about the girls it was clear that he has a long term personal relationship with Michelle and the girls. Nothing wrong with that. What is wrong is pretending you can be objective treating or evaluating them. There is a reason drs are not supposed to treat family members except in dire emergencies—-you can’t be objective. Additionally, purely by chance I stumbled on a personal account of Dr Hyde’s use of what was essentially “conversion therapy” on a homosexual man in 1986—a therapy that is considered unethical by the APA. This is a personal account on the internet of course, so take it with a grain of salt. that said, it did raise my eyebrows because if it is true….
    3) My personal level of discomfort on behalf of the girls because I personally think all the mudslinging nastiness toward their father hurts THEM as well as him. What teenager wants to be so infamous to their classmates, or be asked about their father’s sexuality? I’m middle aged and don’t want to know anything about my parents sexuality frankly. As far as I can see this has served no purpose but to make it ugly. it hasn’t helped their court case at all. which in the end is what matters because it would result in CHANGE. Yet they blame the father for attacking?? As far as I can see he has been quiet as a mouse for the most part (at least comparatively).
    4) the implication that because he was a shitty (excuse my language) husband automatically means he is a shitty parent. These are not necessarily related. Affairs do not mean you are abusing your kids. It means you are an ass to your spouse. that’s it.

    5) all accusations of abuse should be taken seriously. All of them. I have no problem with the allegations being seriously investigated my legal and criminal authorities.

    • wolftertscase says:

      Dr. Phil cutany things and made many promises. Brittany has been attacked this entire time. And lets not forget she was only 18-20. I wouldn’t ever allow people to attack my kids even if they were harming me. I cam argue with them, but better believe no one else can.

      And we are not talking about just a few affairs. We are talking about an addiction. Dr. Hyde was the family therapist three years before the marriage broke up. Brian went to see a sex addict specialist to control his sex addiction.

      There are too many filings and court corruption to list. Google Sandra Dredge, Ron Wilkinson and Kelly peterson. There were years will the three of them had this money racked going on.

      To my knowledge he hasn’t touched the girls. But he would get naked after his wife left for work and force them to have conversations with him. This isn’t normal when dealing with someone who has the history he does.

      There are many things that will come out and yes this is why he he fighting the journals. Just keep looking for the red flags. His are easy to spot.

  12. Just Her says:

    I’ve never seen a post by Michelle. I’ve followed the case closly since seeing the Dr. Phil show.
    Can I offer you some advice? You should proofread your articles before posting. Also maybe check your facts. With the depth of this case this is a very scant and uninformative post. There are a lot of details that go very far back. The limited view you offer your readers is just poor journalism and is not helpful to anybody reading it because they get cherry picked twisted details that are presented out of context.

    • Margo/Mom says:

      Forming an opinion based on a Dr. Phil appearance is probably kinda risky. However–while I don’t pretend to be privy to all that the court and others have available to them regarding this case, it is striking that multiple CPS investigations have not turned up any evidence of the abuse that the father is accused of.

      I did have the opportunity to listen to a recent court hearing, from Utah. Mom’s attorney seemed to be advocating for an “evaluation” (the quotes are because nobody ever came close to specifying exactly what sort of evaluation they were asking for). Their belief (pretty much supported by the GAL–who has interpreted her job as reporting word for word what it is that the girl’s want–no reference at all to “best interest”) is that this “evaluation” would prove something to the whole world. And, of course, key to their perception is their belief that such an evaluation–to be accurate–must involve removing the girls from their father’s home. The GAL referenced “ramifications” that the girls face for talking to her (again, quotes because there was no clarity about what she was talking about).

      The judge, to her credit, stood four-square that while an evaluation might take place at some neutral location (there was a name shared–perhaps an foster family in Kansas who had provided interim care?), she was not going to remove the children from their parent absent any recommendation along those lines from CPS. Further–seemed to indicate that was beyond her jurisdiction in hearing a divorce case in Utah. There was also a “Special Master” participating by phone. I am thinking this is the Kansas connection, who was charged with locating an “evaluator” with sufficient knowledge of family systems to be able to pick up with ongoing counseling. Judge was also firm in stating that supervised visitation with Mom must be overseen by a suitably trained (following Utah standards) supervisor.

  13. Margo/Mom says:

    I would suggest that the court has access to far more information than is (or should be) available on the internet. Far more disturbing than the contents of Mr. Wolfert’s mental health evaluation is that it was apparently shared with his minor children, and subsequently the world, via internet. Equally disturbing is the numbers of people who have read that report (or claim to have read it) and come to the conclusion that Mr. Wolfert is “an admitted pedophile.” Having read the report, I would suggest that this is not the case.

    What I am seeing currently looks like an attempt to get the Utah courts to take on the Kansas court and CPS. A similar strategy was played out in the Rifqa Bary case–using the Florida court (where there was some political pressure friendly to a very noisy faction) to claim that the Ohio court system was inadequate. The attempt was ultimately unsuccessful, although it did serve to keep the case in the headlines and waste some time. Years later that family remains fractured.

    • Hi peggy says:

      Guess he should not have forgot to take it woth him. Michelle’s is posted online. She ia very normal.

      What you are seeing is all wrong. Brian filled out a form and lied. Judge in kansas signed the form. Utah had 30 days to return to girls by the ICJ.

      Utah has jurisdiction in divorce court, Kansas in juvenile. Which completely stopped any abuse petition being heard based on Jurisdiction.

      • Something seems fishy about Michelle Wolfert’s story. “Normal” mothers don’t engage in a teenager family abduction.
        They work within the court system and try to work things out for the benefit of their children not for their benefit.
        It sounds like she didn’t weigh out her other options before she took Danielle and Sydney and hid them.

      • Margo/Mom says:

        It also seems “fishy” from a diagnostic point of view that the older daughter–now an adult and married–has taken on the role of speaking for Danielle and Sydney. While there would be nothing particularly amiss about a sibling’s concern (although her level of blogging and online activism seems to be obsessive), it is curious to hear her speak about “what we want,” as if they are a single person. Speaks to a lack of individuation–which is symptomatic of unhealthy attachment situations.

  14. Wolferts says:

    Girls are all free from their abusive father!!

    • underwatch says:

      Abuser = Kidnapper = Parental Alienator = Michelle Wolferts = Brittany Wolferts — That’s the pathetic story here. There are cases where the kidnapped adult-victim child restores their relationship with her or his father in later years. The punishment for Michelle Wolferts did not fit the crime. Michelle Wolferts = Sandra Rucki. Michelle and Brittany, there is no pathetic future movie or book about your pathetic story.

      • Mike Warner says:

        Uh huh. So what you want the public to think is Michelle and Brittany have such telepathic gifts they were able to mind meld and brainwash the girls two states away and via a one hour weekly, supervised phone call for a couple years. This whole time these girls were in their wonderful father’s care and despite his tremendous work as a “father” both girls were willing to leave to return home to their mom and sister when given the opportunity? Each time with only the clothes on their backs? Are you gonna try and convince the public the earth is flat as well and that Elvis is alive? You’ve made it obvious you’re an idiot. You don’t actually report anything of substance here.

      • underwatch says:

        Mike, it is unfortunate for these girls that Michelle and Brittany are in a very some number of narcissistic, histrionic and selfish parents in this World that are incapable of coparenting and not engaging in parental alienation – the real abusers in this case. If Brittany ended up getting divorced, do you think she would be capable of coparenting? The protective parent movement or cult believes in maternal custody – the real agenda here. The only idiot would be the myopic, ignorant father that would think that one of these so called protective moms would be a good enough mother for his children. If you have an issue, take it to CPS, Family Court, law enforcement – but don’t kidnap children.

      • Mike Warner says:

        Ahhh the ol tangent to a ‘what/if’ statement. I know it’s hard for the narcissistic types like yourself to see through your foggy PA rhetoric but what if you were completely wrong from the on set but just too damn proud to admit it. Good luck little buddy.

      • underwatch says:

        Parental Kidnapping is a Crime and parental kidnappers should be prosecuted by local District Attorneys for this crime. There are other associated felony crimes that should also be prosecuted such as Fraud, Identity Theft, Forgery, Witness Tampering. We noticed Michelle Olson was wearing a hat and sun glasses in the recent photo and Brittany is dressed like a young Faye Yager. Perhaps law enforcement should monitor the activities of them. So much has changed since Faye Yager’s trial with law enforcement’s ability to subpoena cell phone, email and computer records. Hopefully Michelle will move along and become a productive member of society – sorry again, this is not a unique story. No movies or book deals for them.

    • underwatch says:

      The Family Court gave the father in this case sole physical custody of these teenagers. In these cases, the real abuser is Michelle Olson. The challenge for Michelle is to provide for her daughters. Is she able to pay for their college? Many adult children that were kidnapped eventually return to the victim father. They eventually understand that the protective parents like Michelle selfishly put themselves first. This story has not ended yet.

      • Mike Warner says:

        Well I suppose in a world of voodoo magic and telepathic brainwashing Michelle and Brittany both succeeded and “won” despite the 42-page abuse petition. I would hope you’d be intelligent enough to recognize that a settlement got Brian off the hook. Can Michelle pay for her daughter’s College? Who knows but doesn’t really matter?Could the Father pay for their college? Less than 20% of kids in this country get their college paid for by parents. The great thing is the girls are all free and no courts can tell them where they have to live ever again. They clearly made the choice they wanted to and all wound up with their mom and together, college or not.

      • underwatch says:

        Young adults have so many financial needs even after they reach the age of majority. When a parent like Michelle made the decision to kidnap her children, it is considered one of the cruelest forms of child maltreatment. The motive behind these kidnappings is usually anger and revenge and not love and protection of the child. Michelle was the judge, jury and executioner here. So eventually these girls should conclude that Michelle was the abuser. Until that time, it’s a very sad story.

      • Mike Warner says:

        Doesn’t sound like Brian would be too inclined to pay for their college considering he sent them both out the door with only the clothes on their backs. And what do you think about these reunification scams now? Seems pretty silly that a kid has to emancipate from the person that paid for their reunification just to get away from all the craziness. Sure doesn’t seem very successful considering they were it is primary care and control all that time. Wolferts girls are just some of the many that have had to do that.

      • underwatch says:

        All the money that was spent on the kidnapping and custody case could have gone toward the children’s education. All Michelle had to do was to share custody or coparent – or take her custody time without disparaging or engaging in parental alienation. Kelly Rutherford, Madonna, Maya Tsimhoni did it — but not Michelle. What makes Michelle’s situation so different?

      • Mike Warner says:

        You are almost comical if not disparaging yourself. No conviction, no proof. PA is the argument abusers use to cover up abuse. Same case here as in so many others. What is your opinion of Brian Wolferts admitted pedophile and abuse history?

      • underwatch says:

        Sandra Rucki went to jail as did her third party conspirator Dede Evavolds in Minnesota for committing the same crimes as Michelle and allegedly Brittany. Our Criminal Justice System is not perfect, but as long as you call yourself an American you should abide by the laws of our country and our Courts. It sounds like you don’t believe it’s possible to kidnap or alienate a child — and that would be a reason any court ordered evaluation would be reticent to to grant you even joint custody of a child. Michelle committed a number of acts of civil disobedience in this case like other protective parents. She believed like most abusers that she had a self-appointed license to do so. We hope law enforcement might further investigate and prosecute crimes by Michelle. She is a pathetic kidnapper and unprosecuted criminal.

      • Mike Warner says:

        Oh “Ed”. It seems your time in Marin County and work as a computer programmer has made you quite bitter. You should try moving to the country for a slower way of life. Any American knows the courts get it wrong all the time. Maybe in your case they did. On one hand you support the courts which convicted ZERO on the trumped up charges on Michelle and Brittany but then you flip flop and say the courts seemed to miss their opportunity to convict. This instability in opinion and behavior could be what got you into trouble on your own case and relationship. You either support what the courts ruled or not.

Leave a Reply

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

You are commenting using your 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: