Leaderboard 728 X 90

Tuesday, March 26, 2013

CEO Ted Rollins Took A Number Of Extraordinary Steps To Make Sure He Had No Sons Of His Own


Ted Rollins
Ted Rollins took several unusual measures to ensure that he would not have a son of his own during a 14-year marriage to Birmingham resident Sherry Carroll Rollins. This includes having a breathing tube removed from a son who was born three months prematurely.

It all seems to be part of a pattern of abuse that started when Ted and Sherry Rollins got married without a prenuptial agreement. It continued through the Rollins v. Rollins divorce case, which I have called the worst courtroom cheat job that I've encountered. And it continues to this day, with Sherry Rollins struggling to meet expenses each month, leading to frequent threats that her utilities will be cut off.

Did Ted Rollins avoid having a son of his own because he did not want to be tempted to abuse his own flesh and blood? Was this part of the fallout from the documented abuse Ted Rollins heaped upon his stepson, Zac Parrish, who was Sherry Rollins' son from her first marriage?

Based on her statements to Legal Schnauzer, Sherry Rollins apparently believes the answer to those questions is yes. And that is ironic, Ms. Rollins says, because her husband's first marriage, to Monica Bulich, ended largely because she wanted to have children and he did not. From Sherry Rollins' statement to us:

His first wife wanted to have children with him desperately; he left her because of it. But he came and found me with two young sons.

During the second marriage, Ted Rollins became interested in having children of his own--but only under certain conditions. From Sherry Rollins' statement:

Then he said he wanted to have girls; he even went as far as to buy books about conceiving girls. He also talked with doctors on the executive committee of the cancer center at Durham about how to have girls. It was crazy.

Something must have worked because the couple eventually produced two daughters, Sarah and Emma Rollins. But along the way, Ms. Rollins gave birth to a son, who arrived about three months too soon. Both mother and child contracted e coli infections in a case that was so rare that Ms. Rollins' OB/GYN asked for permission to write a research paper on it.

The child's name was Jacob Benjamin Rollins, and he weighed about 1.5 pounds at birth. The little boy lived for about 10 days in the NICU at Wake Forest Medical Center. It's unclear how long he might have lived had Ted Rollins not intervened:

Ted made the doctor take the breathing tube out of his mouth and let him die. [Ted] did not want a son.

Sherry Rollins said the loss of Jacob Benjamin Rollins still haunts her. The child was cremated, and she has kept his ashes.

What's it like to marry into a wealthy family without a prenup? In the case of the Rollins family, it made Sherry Rollins the target of suspicion. That came, she says, mainly from John Rollins Sr. (Ted's father, now deceased); Michele Rollins (Ted's stepmother); Randall Rollins (Ted's billionaire cousin); and Henry Tippie, the family's financial guru who is based in Austin, Texas.

What kind of clout does Henry Tippie have in financial circles? The business school at the University of Iowa is named in his honor. He helps oversee the numbers for Orkin Pest Control, Dover Downs Gaming & Entertainment, and other Rollins enterprises. Says Sherry Rollins:

I read an article somewhere lately that Henry Tippie and Michele are taking money away from Dover Downs. I remember when it went public in 1993 or so, Ted's brother, Jeff, who was 24 years old, made $68 million on the IPO. Ted made somewhere near that, but Mr. Rollins held onto Ted's money as they did not trust his marriage with me, with no prenup in place. I was the only Rollins woman without a prenup. That made them all very nervous from the beginning and influenced how I was treated. They kept private detectives on our house, and especially me. In these families where money is the only respected thing, the new person walking in without their approval and the prenup is a huge threat to their income flow.

As CEO of Campus Crest Communities, Ted Rollins now manages a company that has attracted more than $400 million of Wall Street support. But the family hierarchy did not trust him to manage his own funds. From Sherry Rollins:

Ted was a very wealthy man when we were married. However, John, Michele, Randall, and Henry Tippie made sure that he did not control his own money because of me. I was viewed as nothing more than an ignorant gold digger. . . . Our lives meant nothing at all to these people, and now my daughters are in that same petri dish, watched as [possible threats] to the family wealth.

Previously in the series: 

CEO Ted Rollins Got Married Without a Prenuptial Agreement To Satisfy His Taste For Adolescent Boys (2/7/13)

Ex Wife Of CEO Ted Rollins Might Have Been Warned That She Was About To Marry A Child Predator (2/19/13)

Age Difference Might Explain Much of the Ugliness That Led Rollins Divorce To Be A Colossal Cheat Job (2/26/13)

Why Do Ex Wives Of Campus Crest CEO Ted Rollins Tend To Issue Warnings About Possible Child Abuse? (2/28/13)

43 comments:

Anonymous said...

Why would that NICU have taken out the feeding tube? Babies have been born smaller and survived. Why would that doctor have allowed that? Maybe Ted was afraid of what a son would do to him after years of being abused by Ted. Ted is a coward.

Anonymous said...

Did Sherri try to stop them from removing the feeding tube? This seems so messed up!

legalschnauzer said...

The law in these kinds of situations can be complex, and I'm not sure how it applies from state to state. My understanding is that Sherry Rollins felt the child could survive, and she objected to removal of the feeding tube, but she ultimately left it in her husband's hands.

Anonymous said...

None of us knows all of the details on this, of course, but it sounds like the child would have lived--Ted Rollins just didn't want a special-needs child. That's his business, I guess, but that seems to be the real issue here: When faced with a child that was going to need special attention and care, Ted Rollins said, "No."

Anonymous said...

Maybe Ted Rollins has discovered a new business opportunity. He could market his techniques for conceiving girls. Looks like they worked.

Barb said...

Given the way Mr. Rollins has treated his two daughters, who were born 100 percent healthy, one can only imagine his lack of concern for a special-needs child.

Anonymous said...

@ 10:16. What makes you think the child would have been special needs? This is rather common and surely everyone knows someone touched by a similar story. If special needs qualifies a child to be murdered essentially then too bad Riley, Hubbard, Strange, Rove, Bush Sr 's fathers didn't end them. At least there wouldn't have been a "Dubya"

Anonymous said...

LS, the psychology on this gets deeper and deeper. I don't think it was a matter of Ted Rollins not wanting a special-needs child. He didn't want a son. This was a poorly disguised case of gendercide.

Anonymous said...

@10:27--

This is 10:16, and you are right. I made an assumption re: special needs, but I certainly don't know the child would have been disabled in any way. With the advances that have been made in the care and treatment of preemies . . . who knows how this might have turned out. Sad story.

Anonymous said...

Ted Rollins sounds like a dreadful person, but I have a hard time judging him on this. As someone who is pro choice, I believe all health-care decisions should be handled in a personal and private way. From reading this story, I believe Ted Rollins was acting within the law, in consultation with his wife and a physician, so I see no grounds to point fingers at him.

Sharon said...

I am touched deeply by this:

"Sherry Rollins said the loss of Jacob Benjamin Rollins still haunts her. The child was cremated, and she has kept his ashes."

Anonymous said...

@ 10:48 this isn't a matter of "pro choice"! The child had been born. You are treading on dangerous ground with that view point. What you are saying is that you think a parent should have the choice to end their child's life after birth. That's kind of sick! If that's ok then where would you draw the line in regard to 2 yrs, 3yrs, or 5? How bout 13-16yrs when kids really become a pain in the ass?

Anonymous said...

I can't help but question the rare e coli infection. Did Sherry ever find the source from which she and her baby contracted this infection? Just saying.

Anonymous said...

@11:00--

You misconstrued what I was trying to say and ignored a few key words in my comment. I said "I believe Ted Rollins was acting within the law," and if that was the case, I'm not going to judge him or anyone else in such a situation. I'm not saying a parent should have a right to end a child's life after birth. But this child was being kept alive by extraordinary measures, and that is a different situation under the law--at least as I understand it. I don't claim to be an expert, but I believe removal of a feeding tube is legal. I know this isn't a true "pro choice" matter. But the pro choice viewpoint is built largely on the right to privacy, and I respect Ted and Sherry Rollins' right to privacy. That's the point I was trying to make.

legalschnauzer said...

Anon at 11:02--

I've been trying to find out if Sherry Rollins' physician ever actually published a paper on this case. So far, I haven't been able to find it, and I believe the doctor now is deceased. Apparently, he thought the case was unusual enough to merit an academic article. My understanding is that Ms. Rollins has never come to know how she and the child contracted e coli. I believe this was a pretty serious health scare for her, one requiring heavy doses of antibiotics.

legalschnauzer said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Anonymous said...

This brings back memories of the Terri Schiavo case. Didn't that involve a feeding tube?

legalschnauzer said...

Anon at 11:52--

Yes, removal of a feeding tube was central to the Schiavo case:


http://www.cnn.com/2005/LAW/03/18/schiavo.brain-damaged/

Anonymous said...

Isn't it funny that Ted Rollins rakes in millions from Wall Street investors, but his family wouldn't let him manage his own money?

Anonymous said...

Sherry Rollins and the baby were infected with a chemical like poison or at least the "eboli" was a diagnosis and then, really, the story is hauntingly awful!

Porn Pom

Innocent window dressing, sinister evil
teddy-roll-in sacrificing children, Blamelessness predator
edgy-toothed father, sour slaughterer

TED ROLLINS WEARS A MASK. His mask is that of humans covering up a serious "unknown?" facade.

Anonymous said...

brutal honesty is the root of all healing, LS, you've outmatched your work, just keep the reality cosmic wake-up happening!

thank you, PP

this story is so unbelievably believable about this family of pests controlling the south.

Anonymous said...

I deeply feel for Sherry Rollins on this. She obviously feels she had a son who was taken away from her. I don't think there is any question this child would have lived if it had been left in her hands.

Anonymous said...

Did Sherry ever say that Ted was abusive toward her? Physically I mean. It's obvious that he was mentally and emotionally. I'm just trying to wrap my head around how Ted got out of that marriage alive. He is one lucky sob. If my wife was in her her shoes, Ted would be dead!

When during the marriage did this happen? Before the girls or after the girls? Either way Zach Parrish must have been at an age to understand. I can't help but wonder if Ted may have used this situation to terrorize this family into submission.

legalschnauzer said...

I'm aware of at least one incident where he was physically abusive to her. I'm not sure exactly when the premature boy came. I think it was after Sarah had been born, but before Emma. Ted Rollins probably is lucky to be alive. In some situations, if the wife was not able or willing to hammer back, a male member of her family would do it.

Anonymous said...

The abuse of Sherry Rollins, Emma Rollins, and Sarah Rollins continues. This week, I believe, Sherry Rollins is going to court for two tickets she received for driving a vehicle belonging to Ted Rollins without a proper tag. He has failed to buy the tag for 4 years in a row and each year she goes to court for multiple tickets for expired tags where she is fined for each one. This is an abusive situation for these girls and their Mother each year. He is the one who can purchase the tag as Sherry Rollins is not the owner of the car, just the driver. Actually the abuse has continued way past the date of divorce. Ted Rollins continually punishes the girls and their Mother by ignoring their needs, having their utilities cut off and other ways. He has a need to hurt people and animals and to commit horrible injustices to people who are powerless and to powerless animals.

He is a case study in sociopathic behavior. I know all these behaviors regarding him as I know the Rollins children and their Mother and have watched the havoc and hurt he has heaped on them through the last ten years here in Bham. This man needs help and his investors should demand that he gets help.

jeffrey spruill said...

LS:

It's VERY INTERESTING the name of where the Tippie College of Business is located.

I mean it's just to much of a coincidence & these 1 percenters watch out for their progeny.

Papa John Pizza:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Henry_B._Tippie_College_of_Business

jeffrey spruill said...

In the Schiavo case it's a wonder that Jay Sekulow didn't appeal Justice Kennedy's denial to intervene- to Justice Scalia since Sekulow was down there for the publicity.

The Secrets of Jay Sekulow!

Anonymous said...

You fucking people amaze me. I guess if you were told to drink the kool aid on this blog you would do it. You are all a bunch of idiots that believe what you are fed. Have any of you ever stopped to think for one moment, what if roger and sherry are full of shit. You are all low life's that feed on what you hope are others dirty laundry. That is why you will not amount to anything.
Stand up and be leaders, not followers.

legalschnauzer said...

Anon at 6:48--

Thanks for a "thoughtful" and "well articulated" comment. Your communications skills are impressive:

(1) You address your audience as "you fucking people."

(2) You call your audience a "bunch of idiots" and "low life's."

(3) You hint that two individuals are "full of shit" without giving a single example of anything they are wrong about.

If your audience "will not amount to anything," what do you amount to? Whatever it is, it certainly isn't based on your language skills.

Anonymous said...

@6:48--

Are you saying Sherry Rollins doesn't know what happened with her own son? What gives you such special insight?

Anonymous said...

Congratulations @6:48 for writing what might be the single most vile, insensitive comment I've ever read. This post mostly is about a child and mother contracting a potentially deadly pathogen, and what happened because of it--the child lost his life. And yet, all you seem concerned about it is an unknown burr under your own saddle. What a selfish, sorry individual you must be.

jeffrey spruill said...

@6:48 PM

Exactly what I would expect from watching too much Hannity & Sekulow.

Derangement syndrome!

Anonymous said...

Looks like LS has struck a nerve with 6:48! This is no regular reader other than what they check is written about them. 6:48, the only " fucking idiot" is you! I'd bet you are one of two people! What's so stupid about what you spout is that these allegations are backed up by court documents and other public docs. With that in mind, pretty much makes any other allegation completely believable. What's really even more sad is that I can tell that Sherry probably unintentionally down plays all the sick shit done to her and her children by Ted the pedophile! @ 6:48, I hope someone beats your ass just like Ted The pedophile did to his step son! You seem to have it coming! Cheers

Anonymous said...

Ted Pedophile Rollins family destroyer,
costume ivy league prep school, elitist
social model, exceptionalism’s foul-crawling-monster

Porn Pom

Anonymous said...

Does Duke count as Ivy league? I know for certain the Citadel does not and I'm pretty sure Duke isn't Ivy

Anonymous said...

In looking back at your post on that douche lawyer Duguard on Dec 6, 2012, there is an interesting comment from Anon at 1:53 pm re Bradley Araogant thugs poisoning their wives with biochemical means. I just found it to be an interesting comment considering today's post!

Also word on the street is there is an Alabama judge being investigated by the FBI. Wish I could reveal more but I can't at this time. That loser knows who I'm talking about though! It couldn't be happening to a more deserving piece of sh--!

legalschnauzer said...

Anon at 10:39--

No, Duke is not in the Ivy League. It is, however, considered one of the finest academic institutions in the country--probably on par with such highly ranked private universities as Stanford, Vanderbilt, Northwestern, Notre Dame, and Rice.

e.a.f. said...

what is so interesting in this case is that the former wife and two daughters continue to live at a poverty level. Now it maybe argued Mr. Rollins doesn't owe Mrs. Rollins anything. However, as the father of the two daughters he has a legal, social, moral, and ethical responsibility to provide for his daughters.

How he got out of it is interesting reading, in other articles on this website. Unfortunately divorce appears to be a state issue, with game rules changing from state to state. In Canada, divorce is a federal matter, as is what parents need to pay for child support. There is actually a formula, based on income. It works just fine here. It has resulted in fewer children being on welfare, when a parent has the financial resources to provide.

I am aware many would argue that would be a violation of states' rights. However, what about the rights of a child to live a life not mired in poverty?

Anonymous said...

What If.....6:48 anonymous comments were from Zac Parrish?

Anonymous said...

"prep" school, is to ready one for the "Ivy League," and has all the readiness for the full indoctrination.

PP

legalschnauzer said...

e.a.f.--

Very interesting that divorce/family matters are handled at the federal level in Canada. Don't know if that would help here or not; our federal courts are woefully corrupt, too. But it makes sense if you view children and parents as "national resources" that merit federal protections. It also makes sense from the standpoint of court workload. In the U.S., roughly 90 percent of legal cases are filed in state courts. Go to a state court facility, and you are likely to find a mad house, crawling with people everywhere--and a sense of mass confusion. Go to a federal court facility, and it is almost sedate. On some days, it's as if nothing is going on. Federal court personnel do relatively little work compared to their state-court colleagues. From what I can see, working in a federal courthouse is one hell of a cushy gig.

Anonymous said...

That is so sad. I know several instances where the children were less than one pound and they survived. That should have been considered murder and WHY was "Ped" Rollins allowed to make this decision on his own. Was Mrs. Rollins not 1/2 of the child? This is so F'd up. He scares me.

Anonymous said...

Ped Alert 6:48!!!