Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.

Author Topic: Introduction  (Read 25827 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline SageDad

  • Father of Sage
  • Left Behind Parent
  • Veteran Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2738
    • HagueAbductions.com
Re: Introduction
« Reply #30 on: February 13, 2010, 11:41:55 AM »
Quote from: JoseGrullon;67819


                                                                                           Article 29
This Convention shall not preclude any person, institution or body who claims that there has been a breach of custody or access rights within the meaning of Article 3 or 21 from applying directly to the judicial or administrative authorities of a Contracting State, whether or not under the provisions of this Convention.

I know for a fact that this father has lawyers retained in the Dominican Republic, why hasn't he filed his petition directly then?


Now that is actually not a bad question.
“What you seek is seeking you.”
― Rumi

Offline LukieD

  • Administrator
  • Veteran Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1861
    • http://bringseanhome.org
Re: Introduction
« Reply #31 on: February 13, 2010, 12:43:43 PM »
Quote from: JoseGrullon;67814
Yes "LukieD", Jose Grullon IS my actual name. I don't know if you can say the same... I am also passionate and knowledgeable on International Child Abduction and the Hague Convention of 1980 and 1996. I hope that we can be of assistance to real LBP's. JG

José, I find it interesting that you've taken such an interest in Dhanika's case and that your very first posts on BSH amount to a laundry list of questions for this left-behind parent, some of which I (and others) find entirely inappropriate, especially the manner in which you demand answers as if something is owed to you. Your snotty reference to "real" LBPs did not go unnoticed either.
 
Why don't you tell us where you live, why you're so interested in this case, and whether you have any ties to any of the parties involved (be truthful!). Your posts have all the hallmarks of someone with an ulterior motive other than just being curious about this one case. Afterall, you could have posed similar questions to many of the other parents who've posted their case histories here, but you chose to question Dhanika rather than anyone else. How do you know so much about his case? Please do tell.
« Last Edit: February 13, 2010, 01:10:32 PM by LukieD »

Offline JoseGrullon

  • PSQ
  • Jr. Member
  • *
  • Posts: 20
Re: Introduction
« Reply #32 on: February 13, 2010, 12:58:01 PM »
Quote from: carlos;67820
Yes, the part of the section that you seem to be missing is where it says, "When it is manifest"


Since you don't seem to understand it I looked up a definition of 'manifest' for you:

Manifest
1 : readily perceived by the senses and especially by the sight
2 : easily understood or recognized by the mind : obvious


Expounding upon this article, Elisa Perez-Vera in the Explanatory Report on the writing and spirit of the Hague Convention writes:



In case it is still not clear to you, this article was only intended to be used when it was clear and obvious that the Hague appliation lacked merit.  Such as where the child is not under 16 years of age, the child is not in the country in question or the applicant failed to fill out the applicaiton correctly by leaving out critical information such as the child's name.  It was not intended for the Central Authority to play judge and jury and anyone who pretends that it was is, quite frankly, trying to peddle some ulterior agenda or retarded.

Edit:

I do not know how many applications the State Dept. has denied but I suspect it is very few.  I would be very interested to know how many though, and why they were denied.

Carlos:
I can't speak on behalf of the Dominican CA.

The Dominican Republic is in the top 10 (7th) of the countries to which children are abducted to from the US.

The US is the No. 1 country to which children are abducted to from the DR!!

There have been 7 denied petitions from your State Department and 19 more still pending since 2007, when the convention entered into force between the US and the DR (these are huge numbers by our standards, observing population and the time elapsed)

I have studied the Athukorala-Zemialkowski situation in detail, (I am using it as a case study in the DR) and I agree with you: this matter should be resolved in the courts under the well stablished procedures of the Convention and the system should work by itself so justice can be made.

The dominican parents are also exposed to the same situations brought about by International Child Abduction and the wrong implementation of the Hague Convention.

This is a very worrisome situation for EVERYBODY and I'm glad I could find more people interested in these topics as I am. Let's keep in closer contact in the near future. Please feel free to get in touch with me at anytime.

JG

Offline SageDad

  • Father of Sage
  • Left Behind Parent
  • Veteran Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2738
    • HagueAbductions.com
Re: Introduction
« Reply #33 on: February 13, 2010, 01:08:49 PM »
Quote from: JoseGrullon;67828
Carlos:
I can't speak on behalf of the Dominican CA.

The Dominican Republic is in the top 10 (7th) of the countries to which children are abducted to from the US.

The US is the No. 1 country to which children are abducted to from the DR!!

There have been 7 denied petitions from your State Department and 19 more still pending since 2007, when the convention entered into force between the US and the DR (these are huge numbers by our standards, observing population and the time elapsed)

I have studied the Athukorala-Zemialkowski situation in detail, (I am using it as a case study in the DR) and I agree with you: this matter should be resolved in the courts under the well stablished procedures of the Convention and the system should work by itself so justice can be made.

The dominican parents are also exposed to the same situations brought about by International Child Abduction and the wrong implementation of the Hague Convention.

This is a very worrisome situation for EVERYBODY and I'm glad I could find more people interested in these topics as I am. Let's keep in closer contact in the near future. Please feel free to get in touch with me at anytime.

JG


I can't speak for the US State Dept. but if you stick around for a while you'll find that I definitely do not defend them either.  They have lots of problems too but I'd be very surprised if they were just directly denying applications.  They usually try to get involved as little as possible.  Are you sure it was the State Dept that denied the petition and not the judge who heard the case?
“What you seek is seeking you.”
― Rumi

Offline forthelost

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 379
    • For the Lost
Re: Introduction
« Reply #34 on: February 13, 2010, 02:08:00 PM »
Children abducted to the US from the Dominican Republic should be returned to DR. That's a fact, and if there are cases where LE is not doing so that is wrong. But that doesn't have anything to do with this one case; this is just a father trying to get his daughter home. He's not personally denying Hague returns to the DR. He's not the person you should be angry at.

Offline JoseGrullon

  • PSQ
  • Jr. Member
  • *
  • Posts: 20
Re: Introduction
« Reply #35 on: February 13, 2010, 02:19:07 PM »
Quote from: forthelost;67833
Children abducted to the US from the Dominican Republic should be returned to DR. That's a fact, and if there are cases where LE is not doing so that is wrong. But that doesn't have anything to do with this one case; this is just a father trying to get his daughter home. He's not personally denying Hague returns to the DR. He's not the person you should be angry at.

I am not angry, whatever your name is...

I not the one withholding information either. Your State Depertment and ours have all the information and I dont see it here, it's obvious this father and YOU are not interested in the truth.

The convention specifies under which conditions children are to be returned and I'm curios to know if these conditions have been met before jumping to conclusions and start accusing a Central authority and a country signatory to the HC of violations.

Offline forthelost

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 379
    • For the Lost
Re: Introduction
« Reply #36 on: February 13, 2010, 02:23:57 PM »
The information about this particular case? Right now I'm not talking about cases in general, just this one.

Offline JoseGrullon

  • PSQ
  • Jr. Member
  • *
  • Posts: 20
Re: Introduction
« Reply #37 on: February 13, 2010, 02:31:46 PM »
Quote from: forthelost;67835
The information about this particular case? Right now I'm not talking about cases in general, just this one.


Why don't you give the information that you have on this case then?

Since the father is not disclosing it:

                Originally Posted by JoseGrullon                             
             When was your child taken to the Dominican Republic?
Did you have rights of custody then?
Where you married to the mother of the child?
What does the Mass Law state about children born out of wedlock?
Did you sign a Voluntary Acknowledgment Of Parentage?
When did you file for custody?
When did you file the petition?
Was Mass. the habitual place of residence of your child?
Can courts other than the ones from the habitual place of residence determine custody of children who do not live in their jurisdiction?

Offline JoseGrullon

  • PSQ
  • Jr. Member
  • *
  • Posts: 20
Re: Introduction
« Reply #38 on: February 13, 2010, 02:44:18 PM »
« Last Edit: February 13, 2010, 02:47:03 PM by JoseGrullon »

Offline forthelost

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 379
    • For the Lost
Re: Introduction
« Reply #39 on: February 13, 2010, 02:45:26 PM »
1) She was apparently taken sometime in 2008, although the official missing date is February 2009.

2) He has stated at the time he had joint custody of her and since obtained full custody.

3) I have no idea and it's not really relevant to the issue at hand.

4 ) Here; it's a very long read.

5) No idea.

6) According to the ruling here, March 13, 2009.

7) No idea.

8) She was born in Northhampton and apparently lived there until her abduction, so I'll say yes.

9) Yes and no; another country can say "screw you, we're not returning this person" and this does happen. It doesn't change the ruling in the home country though.

Offline JoseGrullon

  • PSQ
  • Jr. Member
  • *
  • Posts: 20
Re: Introduction
« Reply #40 on: February 13, 2010, 02:56:34 PM »
Quote from: forthelost;67840
1) She was apparently taken sometime in 2008, although the official missing date is February 2009.

2) He has stated at the time he had joint custody of her and since obtained full custody.

3) I have no idea and it's not really relevant to the issue at hand.

4 ) Here; it's a very long read.

5) No idea.

6) According to the ruling here, March 13, 2009.

7) No idea.

8) She was born in Northhampton and apparently lived there until her abduction, so I'll say yes.

9) Yes and no; another country can say "screw you, we're not returning this person" and this does happen. It doesn't change the ruling in the home country though.


Dhan, where are you?

Offline forthelost

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 379
    • For the Lost
Re: Introduction
« Reply #41 on: February 13, 2010, 02:59:34 PM »
You said you wanted answers to those questions; I provided as much as I could. Why does it matter who answers them?

Offline JoseGrullon

  • PSQ
  • Jr. Member
  • *
  • Posts: 20
Re: Introduction
« Reply #42 on: February 13, 2010, 03:15:56 PM »
Quote from: forthelost;67842
You said you wanted answers to those questions; I provided as much as I could. Why does it matter who answers them?

Because those are not the real facts.

Offline forthelost

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 379
    • For the Lost
Re: Introduction
« Reply #43 on: February 13, 2010, 03:24:52 PM »
Quote from: JoseGrullon;67844
Because those are not the real facts.

Okay then, show the information that proves otherwise.

Offline SageDad

  • Father of Sage
  • Left Behind Parent
  • Veteran Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2738
    • HagueAbductions.com
Re: Introduction
« Reply #44 on: February 13, 2010, 03:29:49 PM »
Quote from: JoseGrullon;67844
Because those are not the real facts.

I don't like the way this discussion is going.  If the father has been unclear or dishonest about some aspect of this case history that you would like to clarify or correct you should just come out and say it rather than asking questions you appear to already know the answer to.  Our purpose here is to support the parents and children that have been victimized by parental abduction and your posts appear to be intended to taunt and antagonize one of the parents that has come here looking for help.  This appearance is not helped by the fact that you began here by defending an action by the Dominican Central Authority that any person with any real background working with the Abduction Convention would denounce as directly in contravention with the spirit and letter of the law.
“What you seek is seeking you.”
― Rumi