Leaderboard 728 X 90

Thursday, June 21, 2012

Ties to Johnny Cash Help Prove That Ted Rollins Committed Perjury In His Alabama Divorce Case

Johnny Cash

In my research on the Rollins v. Rollins divorce case in Alabama, I haven't found many reasons to write nice things about Ted Rollins. To put it in blunt terms, the CEO of Campus Crest Communities seems like a thoroughly dishonest, abusive, and selfish human being.

But I must give Ted Rollins credit for one thing: He was a friend of Johnny Cash, close enough that Rollins served as an active pallbearer at Cash's funeral in 2003. Even the people who have been mistreated by Ted Rollins, and I've come to know several of them, would have to admit that is pretty cool.

In standard Rollins fashion, however, his coolest attribute must come with an asterisk. His ties to Johnny Cash, it turns out, help prove that Ted Rollins committed perjury in the divorce case that left his ex wife and two daughters on food stamps in Birmingham.

How did Ted Rollins become friends with the "Man in Black"? My understanding is that both the Rollins and Cash families have strong ties to Jamaica, and that's how the connection was made. In fact, Johnny Cash had a home called Cinnamon Hill in Jamaica, and it was next door to Rose Hall, which is part of a resort owned by the Rollins family.

Actually, Johnny Cash was more than just a friend to Ted Rollins. He was his godfather.

That's one reason Rollins was on hand for the Johnny Cash Festival last summer at Arkansas State University in Jonesboro. The event featured performances by Kris Kristofferson, George Jones, and other music luminaries. It was designed to help fund the preservation of Johnny Cash's childhood home in Dyess, Arkansas, a small community about 30 miles east of Jonesboro.

Rosanne Cash, Johnny's daughter, probably could be described as the lead performer at the festival. And how did she get there? Well, she flew on one of Ted Rollins' three private jets--and we have a picture to prove it.

What does all of this have to do with perjury? You might recall that Ted Rollins stated in an Alabama child-support affidavit, called a CS-41, that he made roughly $50,000 a year. You can check out the Rollins CS-41 form, which was signed under oath and under penalty of perjury, at the following link.

This obvious question comes to mind: How many guys making $50,000 a year can afford to fly a famous person such as Rosanne Cash in a private jet? How many guys making $50,000 a year can fly anyone, famous or not, in a private jet?

And what about the picture from inside the private jet? Well, you can check it out below. That's Rosanne Cash, on the right, with Ted Rollins' daughters, Sarah and Emma Rollins (center).

Sarah and Emma Rollins, by the way, are the children who have been forced to be on food stamps because of the massive cheat job Ted Rollins perpetrated on their mother, Sherry Carroll Rollins.

I wonder if the Cash family knows about that. I wonder if they know that Johnny Cash's godson has turned into a flagrant perjurer who has caused his own children to suffer. So much for Rollins family values.


Photobucket

8 comments:

Anonymous said...

See the whole decision:

http://caselaw.lp.findlaw.com/cgi-bin/getcase.pl?court=us&vol=152&invol=211

NOTICE – THERE ARE NO JUDGES

STATEMENT OF FACTS

United States district court Judge A.B. Fair

This sample judicial misconduct complaint made against the United States district court judge named above is filed, in accordance with the Ninth Circuit Rules of the Judicial Council only for the purpose of demonstrating the official Title 28 U.S.C. judicial misconduct complaint process. Actual complaints should only be made after consulting the rules governing such complaints. This sample complaint exceeds the five page limitation on the Statement of Facts imposed by the Ninth Circuit Rules.

"BY THE WAY, iF you do a FOIA on the judges in that court, you will find that all of them have a Form 61 stating that they are in fact all "Employees of the United States ." You can't be an employee and also an "Officer of the United States " under Article 2 Section 2 Clause 2. You must have an Office created by law (Congress). Their purported Civil Commission is in the Dept. of Justice, it should be in the Secretary of State's office under the seal of the United States , but it is under the seal of the DoJ."

legalschnauzer said...

Anon:

Your comment doesn't have anything to do with the subject of the post, but I ran it and hope readers will check it out. I haven't verified the information in your comment, but you raise some potentially important issues--especially for those of us who have followed the Don Siegelman case in Alabama.

For example, if a federal judge is considered an "employee of the United States," how could he hear any criminal matter? One of the parties always is going to be the United States, and he is their employee.

This very issue was critical in the Siegelman case because the judge, Mark Fuller, is an owner in a company that has received millions in federal contracts. He's become rich off the U.S., but he heard a case where the U.S. was a party.

If Fuller also is considered an "employee of the United States," that provides additional grounds to have him removed from the case.

I would welcome comments that agree with, or rebut, assertions that Anon makes. Pretty interesting stuff.

jeffrey spruill said...

In the United States, where everyone is a commoner, separation of powers remains relevant to the sustenance of liberty.

**

I don't believe for one minute Uncle Ted Rollins would agree with that assertion.

Anonymous said...

LS, all matters of law are, for whatever we can do, to "ignite the brush fire" -- as slave trader Thomas Jefferson said.

Sad truth about our start, America was built on the slave trader beginning in New York where the WALL was built to keep the natives out of trading.

Now this trading system has grown into "government Too Big To Fail" and the slave trading was stopped, notice?

America's biggest fight is to bring our selves into line with what the tap root is and then organize our MIND wholly.

MONEY, or the cover-up of how this is and has been, "letters of credit," and certainly there is NOT ONE "JUDGE" who appears ready to defend our US Constitution's right to be sovereign in coining our own currency.

Hmmmmm, the "Justices" are not exactly Article III, when the jury trial has been designed to fit the mold of exactly what the system in the U.S. is, a biometric gulag paying the retirement portfolios of the TRAITORS.

anon

Robby Scott Hill said...

How does a journalist uncover a great story?

Persistence, the way Johnny Cash got his car & the way I'll eventually get to take the bar:

I got it one piece at a time.
It didn't cost me a dime.
You'll know it's me when I come through your town.

Well it's a 49, 50, 51, 52, 53, 54,
55, 56, 57, 58, 59 automobile...

It's a 60, 61, 62, 63, 64, 65, 66, 67, 68, 69, 70 automobile

Remember - If you can't pay for it today, acquire it on time :)

Anonymous said...

LS, don't know whether or not you have done your homework on the judicial standing in the oath(s) taken for their "districts?"

The Ninth Circuit states it is THE District and the judges named, mostly, do not comply with the law regarding the jurisdiction stipulation.

It appears there is definitely a problem in the U.S. and this explains why a Harvard grad in Constitutional Law can become a President without actually authenticating the position with the true credentials to be a Commander in Chief of the largest military, except for Russia and China. Not to mention a dictator of Executive Orders that are well designed by the SUPREME COURT as the "Agents" to the Super Elite Powers that are globalists without names - those at the very top that is, appear quite invisible.

It appears the majority of Americans literally walk into a slaughterhouse, in essence.

THE COURT?(S)?

Three branches of government and the "Court" is supposedly our BRANCH OF GOVERNMENT to check and balance all the changing in trading and exchanging?!

How did the majority of Americans become simply the stock, herded into pens [Public Retirement Portfolios], for mark to market that the "JUSTICES" get to retire upon as though an ESQ dressed modern but, the lust and fulfillment for the most, pre Magna Carta?

In a word, tyranny.

Brainwashing by the owners of the MEDIA is a cancer in our imaginations.

I'll send a letter I've written to the Attorney General appointed by the Obama Admin, who needs investigators LS.

Anonymous said...

regardless of the people and details of their individual conduct or specifics of their case, etc...what continues to go ignored is the fundamental wrong that the entire Alabama child custody laws do, violate, abuse, and create as a result of the abuse and violations of Fit Parents God given and Constitutional rights to their children and the childrens God given and Constitutional right to both of their parents. so you complain about the results in Rollins case yet ignore that which creates the results. point is, child support is more than money yet most of you don't have the mental capacity to understand that. child support is ALWAYS thought of as CASH MONEY by you all. yet a child need support of their parents far more than being an ATM. child suppoet is ransom money to see your children, that is what it is. you overhear tons of mothers say that they won't let the daddy see his kids unless he pays!! child support ransom money is a result of a violation of a your parental rights, God given and Constitutionally safeguarded, yet violated by Alabama judges and lawyers and legislators. When you have a starting point, a starting process, a method, that abuses, violates and treats the people involved unequal, then when you get horrible results, it is simple as cause and effect: you rely on a horrendous method to determine child custody and child support ransom money and then when the results are not good, you wonder why, and you ignore what created them. Ignorance abounds!! financially supporting the child involves BOTH parents - LOOK at the CS41 and CS42 forms - it has BOTH parents on it. BUT only ONE parent is REQUIRED by LAW to prove they provide their part of the CS41 and CS42. Why? Why only one parent - the payer? The parent receivng child support ransom money does not and is not required to prove they spend it on the child. so how many circumstances would any of you sign up for where you pay your half but the other person is not required to do anything/ If you don't pay yours, you go to jail. If they don't pay theirs, oh well, so what. That is not equal under law, it aint right, and it aint even common sense. again, a flawed process will always lead to horrendous outcomes. so stop the shock treatment and railing on ANY person who is abused by the child support laws as a result of abusive and violative Alabama child custody laws. go ask the person who is supposed to receive child support ransom money to PROVE they spend and account for the amount on the CS41 and CS42 forms. you won't get one parent to prove this and they will attack you for even asking them to prove their support of the children. be fair. Be equal. Ask the mom to prove she provides her required amount of child support on CS41 and CS42. - chris hobbs www dot WhyJudgeHall dot com

Ana Mary said...

New documentary featuring Johnny Cash, "My Father and The
Man In Black," sells out London's Hyland Cinema. Coming to a film
festival near you?