Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.

Author Topic: Translated Brazilian case review  (Read 783 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.


  • Guest
Translated Brazilian case review
« on: March 14, 2009, 03:41:15 PM »
This has been published in a Brazilian newspaper website and it is the free translation from the original in portuguese. They are also planing to do a protest in Copacaban Beach tomorrow.



For those who do not know or has not followed the news, Joao Paulo Lins e Silva is being unfairly persecuted and bombarded by an intense campaign primarily promoted by the American media that is distorting facts and inventing lies to try to influence public opinion against him in judicial proceedings involving the custody of a child of 8 years named Sean.
  Sean is the son of David and Bruna Bianchi Goldman, and lives in Brazil since 2004, when his mother decided to separate from her American husband. Sean came to Brazil with the consent of his father and remained in the Country Legally, supported by a judicial decision that granted custody to his mother. That is, the residence of Sean in the country was not illegal, nor it was a kidnapping, as the biological father tries to make believe.
  Being dissatisfied with the decision of his wife to divorce, the biological father chose to halt an exhausting legal battle losing the right to live with his son in the last 4 years. This was a suicidal strategy outlined by his lawyers in the U.S. trying to characterize a kidnapping, which in fact did not. Over the past 4 and a half years, David came to Brazil a few times to monitor trials and never requested in court to visit Sean. He only did it immediately after the tragic and premature death of Bruna, drawing from the moment of emotional and psychological fragility of the family and particularly of Sean.
  Stressed that David was 4 years and a half discussing the legal issue in Brazil and never asked to see the child, neither gave any help in its upkeep. Interestingly, only after the death of the mother of Sean, is that David went to fight to see the child. A surge of interest at least arouses surprise.
  In one of David visits to Brazil to attend a trial, he was quoted by an official of Justice in action for divorce brought by Bruna. This quote was also in the presence of David Brazilian lawyer. So he can not claim ignorance. He insists on saying that it is legally married to Bruna and has accused her of bigamy. This is a big farce! The process of divorce has normally passed in the Brazilian justice after David been noticed and approved by the Judge. So there is no need to talk about bigamy!
  When every man marries a woman born in another state or another country he should be aware that if some day the marriage is over, the woman can return to live in your home state or country. And if the couple have children, it is natural that the custody is with the mother. This happens daily in the lives of couples who are separated. In a situation of a couple living in New York and that after the separation, the woman decides to stay back in the house of his parents in Los Angeles, for example, will require the husband moves from time to time to visit his son. If that situation involve couples of different countries, the situation is exactly the same.
  So the fact that Bruna has returned to Brazil and decided to discuss here in their country of origin their separation, does not change anything that would obviously be traced after the separation, with custody to the mother and regulations for visits to the father. David adopted a strategy of "all or nothing" and at sole David will stayed away from his child. Joćo Paulo came to start a relationship with Bruna more than 6 months after his return to Brazil. Before that they were not talking. It should be clear that the residence of Bruna with her son in Brazil was not premeditated and that Joćo Paulo had no involvement in this, simply because he not even had contact with Bruna at that time.
  Gradually the lives of Joćo Paulo and Bruna began to unite and Sean was having the first contact with Joćo it was all very natural and spontaneous. Joćo Paulo never tried to take the place of David as biological father of Sean. It was always made clear to Sean that he had a father who loved him in the U.S. and that some day he would come to visit him. Bruna was concerned to keep pictures of David and Sean on the wall of the bedroom of the boy, even after having been married to Joćo Paulo. Bruna always worried about this, so that the child had not any trauma or feel rejected by the biological father. So always tried to pass a positive image of David for Sean.
  Who had the opportunity to live with the couple, certainly witnessed Joćo Paulo telling Sean that he was a child more than special to have 2 parents, a Brazilian and an American. While some children do not have a father, he had two! And should feel happy for that. This has always been the message conveyed to the child. The only thing that Joćo Paulo did in the last 4 years was to give unconditional love to the child, creating it and maintaining it as if your child was legitimate. And the recognition of all this demonstration of affection and love came from Sean himself, now calling Joćo Paulo father and has hold fast to it as such. As you all know, love is not something money can buy.
  In past few years, the Brazilian Justice considered the case of Sean and decided at all levels (Federal Court and Supreme Court) that the child should remain in the country this matter is res judicata. Defeated in every instance, David took advantage of the death of Bruna to try again, by transverse means, a matter which had already been examined and judged. Hence, the U.S. Government came on the scene and urged the Brazilian General Counsel of the Union(AGU), which filed a new action for a matter which had already been judged. The AGU not even have standing to act in such a case!
  The question then came out of the technical, legal sphere, and went to the political sphere. David made a case that went in secret of justice in a reality show. David began to financially exploit the image of his son by selling mugs, shirts and caps. Went to different audience shows of all programs that he could and always showed the image of the child. Never tried to preserve the image of his child.
  David did not respect the morning of the family. Joćo Paulo barely had time to wipe the tears after the death of his wife, the person he loved most in the world. Joćo Paulo barely had time to take care of his new-born baby thats mother has died at birth. Joćo Paulo had no more peace. He was charged kidnapping! He was called a bandit, the defeat of Justice, the thief of children. The only thing that Joćo did in the last few years has been to love this child. And now the biological father tries to transfer to Joćo Paulo the full responsibility for its failure over 4 years. If David was silent and waived the right to see his son (because he never asked in court), why Joćo Paulo has been blamed for this?
  It is easy now to accuse the family from been unable to see the child. What evidence existis that he has tried to see the child? Because he never asked in court. At the time he "decided" to want to see the child, he learned quickly how to do this. Unfortunately this only happened after the death of Bruna, when the child became an heir to considerable wealth.
  David filed a lawsuit in the U.S. against the parents of Bruna and accepted to quit the action in exchange for USD 150,000 (USD 500,000 he sought, but accepted the agreement for USD 150,000). It is a person who exchange their convictions for money. To drop the action against the parents of Bruna, David judicially recognized in the U.S. that it was not a kidnapping. So why he continues claiming that it was a kidnap? The parents of Bruna NEVER prevented David from seeing or talking to your child. They even send him a plane ticket so he could come to Brazil to visit the child, but he never used it.
  Brazil is a sovereign country and has an independent and competent judiciary to prosecute and judge the causes that deals here. Americans have always criticized and down turned the Brazilian judiciary. This is absurd, a real affront to our democratic system of law. We need to mobilize and attract the attention of the authorities and opinion-forming people not to commit a great injustice to Joćo Paulo, and especially with Sean. Removing the child at this time would be a familiar fear. Separate Sean from his sister of 6 months, its largest link with the mother, the maternal grandparents and his adopted father would be very detrimental to the emotional child.
  [FONT="]Since the biological father waited almost 5 years to ask to see the child, his visits can be conducted and increase in little steps in the right measure, with psychological monitoring, keeping guard with the Brazilian family. That is what we hope happens. That our illustrious judges respect Sean desire, and not surrender to pressure from the American government or anyone else.