Carlos,
I've worked on this since yesterday. Any critique? Is this O.K.? Now I just need a comprehensive list of people to send it to. I sent email to your senators before and either rec'd no reply or the mail was returned as undeliverable.
I'm am at my Florida home now, but will send to Cali and N.Y. senators also.I thought about saying I would plaster this all over the internet,(and I will too)
I am writing today to implore you to intervene in any way you can. The situation is that a Hague Case has been filed and certain information is needed which as you will see below is being held up by incompetence and ignorance. How can a department run like this? I don't know. All I know is that if this information is NOT released, YESTERDAY, the only reason for this father to not have his son returned will be the ineptitude of employees working in a government capacity without a CLUE as to what they are supposed to be doing.
All the information is below and are direct quotes from either the father of the child or employees of the OCI/State Dept. in their emails.
For a brief overview and synopsis read the bold print first.
The Office of Children's Issues is part of the US State Department. Its office has been designated as the Central Authority of the United States for the Hague Conventions on child abduction and adoption.
Article 7 of the Hague Abduction Convention states (in part):
Central Authorities shall co-operate with each other and promote co-operation amongst the competent authorities in their respective State to secure the prompt return of children and to achieve the other objects of this Convention.
In particular, either directly or through any intermediary, they shall take all appropriate measures –
d) to exchange, where desirable, information relating to the social background of the child;
f) to initiate or facilitate the institution of judicial or administrative proceedings with a view to obtaining the return of the child and, in a proper case, to make arrangements for organizing or securing the effective exercise of rights of access;
g) where the circumstances so require, to provide or facilitate the provision of legal aid and advice, including the participation of legal counsel and advisers;
i) to keep each other informed with respect to the operation of this Convention and, as far as possible, to eliminate any obstacles to its application.Carlos D. Bermudez Says:
In the recent decision by the family court judge to deny my son's return to the US she claimed that my wife hasn't been to the US since October of 2007 and that since I waited till June 2008 to file the Hague application, even though that would still be within one year, I must have consented to the abduction of my son or I wouldn't have waited so long. I
submitted receipts and confirmation numbers for plane tickets that prove my wife was in the US until May of 2008 but the Mexican court has claimed that these "private" documents cannot be substantiated as well as a vehicle title for a car my wife registered in NC but the judge also held that it was possible that she registered a North Carolina title, which is a public document, without ever coming to NC and didn't seem to care that the address on the title was our address.
Today I wrote the following
email to Allison Woodley of the Office of Children's Issues:
from: Carlos D. Bermudez
to: "Woodley, Allison" <woodleya#state.gov>
date May 1, 2009 11:22 AM
</woodleya#state.gov>><woodleya#state.gov>Ms. Woodley,
Can you tell me the </woodleya#state.gov><woodleya#state.gov>status of my request</woodleya#state.gov><woodleya#state.gov> to have certified information on any and all entries into the US made by my wife and son between the Dates of October 2007 and August 2008 given to my Hague attorney in Mexico? Although I have faxed back the Privacy Act Waiver my lawyer tells me that he hasn't received any phone calls. As I stated in my first email to Mr. Leyva a failure to provide this information in a timely fashion will render it useless in the Hague proceedings for my son. I regret that I feel it needs to be said, but if I do not have confirmation from your office that this information will provided I will be writing to my Senators and inviting friends and family to do the same this weekend and then working to have the press cover the OCI's refusal to release critically pertinent information relating to the international abduction of my son by his non-custodial mother to a country that, by the State Departments own reports, demonstrates patterns of non-compliance, with the justification for not doing so being the "privacy" of the abductor and the child who are my legal wife and son, respectively.
Regards,
Carlos D. Bermudez
(919) 308-0889
</woodleya#state.gov>>My son's details are:
Name: Sage Antonio Bermudez Rayon
DOB: May 14th 2007
Thank you!!
Carlos D. Bermudez
<!-- / message --> <!-- sig --> Father of internationally abducted child Sage Antonio Bermudez Rayon
I called the number I had for my
caseworker, William Herzog, at the OCI on Tuesday, April 28th. Strangely enough the number got me to the
voicemail of one Daisy Cardiel, a name I recognized as the case worker for many of the parents of children abducted to Brazil that I've met through BSH. Because of the urgency, I then
called the main switchboard to be able to speak to someone in person rather than leave a message for Daisy who, to my knowledge, doesn't handle cases in Mexico anyway. After explaining my situation to the duty officer I eventually was put through to one
Saul Leyva who said he would
cover for Mr. Herzog during his, and another person whose name I did not recognize, absence. I explained to him what it was that I needed and
he was very non-commital a
bout whether or not they'd be able to provide it since it may not exist or they may not have access. I told him I refused to believe that records of entry to the United States were not kept or that they would not have access to such information taking the additional step of saying I know of specific cases where they have made exactly such information available to other parents (one of whom is a member here). He asked me to provide him with detailed information about the dates I was interested, but said he
would need the Alien Registration number of my wife. While I again found it hard to believe they wouldn't have that information readily available it was not a problem because I did.
I emailed him the information on dates and my wife's A# and the next day got an email from Ms Woodley saying:
From: Woodley, Allison
Sent: Wednesday, April 29, 2009 10:05 AM
To: Carlos
Subject: Bermudez, Sage Antonio
DEPARTMENT OF STATE
BUREAU OF CONSULAR AFFAIRS
OFFICE OF CHILDREN'S ISSUES
SA-29, 2100 Pennsylvania Avenue, 4th Floor, Washington, D.C. 20037
FAX NO. (202) 736-9132 TEL. NO. (202) 736-9130
Home page: http://travel.state.gov
U.S. CENTRAL AUTHORITY FOR THE HAGUE CONVENTION ON THE CIVIL
ASPECTS OF INTERNATIONAL CHILD ABDUCTION
April 29, 2009
Dear Mr. Bermudez,
This is in response to your inquiry on April 27, on behalf of your son's pending Hague case with the Mexican Central Authority. Most land border entries for Legal Permanent Residents (LPRs) entering and exiting the USA do not keep permanent records.
Please feel free to contact me if you should have any additional questions regarding your case.
Regards,
Mrs. Allison Woodley
Office of Children's Issues
WoodleyA#state.gov
Tel: 202-736-9162 Reading carefully
she says "Most land border entries for Legal Permanent Residents (LPRs) entering and exiting the USA do not keep permanent records." What does that even mean? How is that a response? I immediately
called her and when she repeated the same thing to me I said that, while I understood it,
I was not asking IF records existed, I was
asking to be provided any and all records that DID exist. She repeated mutliple times that record's were not always kept and
I kept saying that that was an unacceptable answer firstly, because I had already provided Saul with an airline, flight number, and date of a flight where my wife and son flew into the US after returning from their Oct. 2007 trip, which was not a "land border crossing". Secondly, because
saying that records "may not exist" is no where near the same thing as, "we've checked and can confirm they don't exist". We then spent some time in which
she tried to convince me that the OCI didn't have access to these records. Once again I said that I knew that not to be true and the the OCI had working relationships with every other relevant governmental agency.
She told me again that it was Homeland Security that would have any such records if they existed and that I could try contacting them. To which
I replied that I would not contact Homeland Security, it is the OCI that is charged with handling abduction cases and assisting LBP's and the
OCI undoubtedly already had an existing arrangement with Homeland Security and they would only demand that I work with the OCI after wasting untold amounts of my time. Finally
Ms. Woodley said what I knew she was avoiding the entire time with the other pretexts, specifically, that there may be "privacy issues". I said there should be no issues since the abductor was still legally my wife and the abductee was my minor child and that by not making this information available they were assisting in the international abduction of a US Citizen by hiding behind protecting the privacy of an abducting wife and abducted son from their husband and father. I was getting quite angry and when it became clear that Ms Woodley would not satisfy me with saying the information "may not exist", "that they may not have access to it" or that giving it to me violated some privacy right, she asked if I would like to speak to her supervisor, to which I replied, Absolutely. Shortly thereafter I was placed on a
conference call with the Abduction Unit Chief Martha Pacheco. I explained the details of my case, situation and needs to Ms. Pacheco and also what was by now, my lengthy list of complaints with regards to the support I had received by the OCI and the US Embassy in Mexico. I also
emphasized the need for urgency in providing this information so that it could be included in my appeal. For what it's worth,
she seemed geniunely concerned, and committed to me that if I got them a Privacy Act Waiver they would work with my attorney directly to "get him what he needs". Admittedly I did not like the "get him what he needs" as I preferred they would give him what I asked for, but I thanked her and said I would send in the PAW immediately.
I faxed them a PAW for my attorney within the hour. That was
Wed. April 29th and as of today
no one has tried contacting my attorney and we need to file our appeal on Wed. My caseworker, Mr. Herzog, will be back on Monday and I will call him to see what he can (or rather will) do and if I get the usual run around will ask to speak with Ms. Pacheco again but I am running out of time. <!-- / message --> <!-- sig --> __________________
Father of internationally abducted child Sage Antonio Bermudez Rayon
