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?