I won my Hague case!!! Now what???

[Dan_Plainview]

Could it be that the AGU has just accepted that your case meets the requirement to file under the Hague and that the "decision" after filing was just to serve the abductor and seize the abductor and children's passports??? I think it is a strong possibility. You need to contact your attorney at the AGU (Now that you have one assigned)!

[tweinstein]

Could it be that the AGU has just accepted that your case meets the requirement to file under the Hague and that the "decision" after filing was just to serve the abductor and seize the abductor and children's passports??? I think it is a strong possibility. You need to contact your attorney at the AGU (Now that you have one assigned)!

Technically, the LBP is not permitted to speak to the attorney at the AGU. The plaintiff is the Brazilian government, not the LBP. Every time I spoke to the attorney representing my interests, he reminded me that he was doing me a favor. When he felt that my questions were becoming too demanding (before the phone numbers stopped working), he simply told me not to call back again.

[Bree]

Technically, the LBP is not permitted to speak to the attorney at the AGU. The plaintiff is the Brazilian government, not the LBP. Every time I spoke to the attorney representing my interests, he reminded me that he was doing me a favor. When he felt that my questions were becoming too demanding (before the phone numbers stopped working), he simply told me not to call back again.

What a way to make someone feel supported!  

[Dan_Plainview]

Technically, the LBP is not permitted to speak to the attorney at the AGU. The plaintiff is the Brazilian government, not the LBP. Every time I spoke to the attorney representing my interests, he reminded me that he was doing me a favor. When he felt that my questions were becoming too demanding (before the phone numbers stopped working), he simply told me not to call back again.

Of course you are right Tim. I forgot that when you use the BCA/AGU it is USA vs. Brazil (or is it BCA vs. TP?) ... when you have personal representation (like David) it is LBP vs. TP. Isn't that so?  I also think that the OCI isn't technically involved if/when you hire private counsel.

If there is a hearing, how is it that you find out so that you can be deposed etc?!?! Are you to rely on the communication between the BCA/AGU and OCI. That's broke by all accounts!

[dmdaven2]

Of course you are right Tim. I forgot that when you use the BCA/AGU it is USA vs. Brazil (or is it BCA vs. TP?) ... when you have personal representation (like David) it is LBP vs. TP. Isn't that so?  I also think that the OCI isn't technically involved if/when you hire private counsel.

If there is a hearing, how is it that you find out so that you can be deposed etc?!?! Are you to rely on the communication between the BCA/AGU and OCI. That's broke by all accounts!

The idea is to not return children at all...that's the main goal of the US Dept of State and everyone in Brazil

Essentially...

[tweinstein]

Of course you are right Tim. I forgot that when you use the BCA/AGU it is USA vs. Brazil (or is it BCA vs. TP?) ... when you have personal representation (like David) it is LBP vs. TP. Isn't that so?  I also think that the OCI isn't technically involved if/when you hire private counsel.

If there is a hearing, how is it that you find out so that you can be deposed etc?!?! Are you to rely on the communication between the BCA/AGU and OCI. That's broke by all accounts!

When you use the AGU, it is Brazil vs TP and the BCA and OCI are involved. When you use a private attorney, it is LBP vs TP and the BCA and OCI are not involved. The BCA and AGU are only involved in David's case because of the publicity and complexity.

[Dan_Plainview]

oh my, you must have that number and also more contact with AGU!
 
http://www.trf3.gov.br/ , that´s the website of the Federal Court of São Paulo, but the proceeding is running under secrecy of justice, so I believe a research by the family name won´t help.
 
would help a lot a private lawyer in São Paulo...
 
she can fill an appeal against the preliminary decision, but we don´t have sure what this decisions is talking about.

If it is that the "decision" at this point was to serve the TP with court papers and seize the documents then I think at this point it may not be being run under secrecy of justice ...

Wish there were a way to know more ... I guess the process is to rely on the OCI, which is understaffed, there is a time difference and a language barrier with BCA. On the other end, the BCA/AGU are understffed, as well ... which nicely feeds into the slow system that doesn't return children because too much time has passed. If they cared at all, staffing the BCA and AGU would be a good start. But that will be the last thing that they do because their six weeks doesn't technically start until the first filing, right?

[Wendy]

Ok...after reading all of the posts in this thread I have to say that the system as it is is seriously broken and you all should be SERIOUSLY pissed off about that.  Once you all get your kids back, I say we start fighiting with these organizations to do their jobs! Whether or not you have a private attorney should have NO affect on the kind of information you get in this regard. It's the most pathetic pile of beaurocratic garbage I've seen in a while.  
 
Also with regards to the Dept. of State and the OCI, I think "we" need to get after Obama to clear this mess.  Clearly there is a lack of transparency with these offices!

[kmoor88]

Emails, letters and phone calls is not working. We get an automated reply. Old fashioned in your face protesting always gets the message across loud and clear. The left behind parents have suffered long enough with no changes or penalties for not complying with the Hague Convention.

[hatufim.org]

Here is an update on the case. After almost a month of phone calls and emails, I finally got a copy of the petition filed by the AGU, and the preliminary court decision.
 
I am posting this info here not to complain about anything going on there, but to get your opinions and advice, to know if you have seen anything like this before, and if not, just to let you know how things work when you have a very solid Hague case.
 
What I understood from the papers is because I speak Spanish but not Portuguese. The initial petition written by the AGU was very well written, no complaints with that.
 
The Court decision appears to be in my favor completely in regards to the Hague case itself, but there appear to be some indications of a few problems.
 
The first problem is the issue of the dates. My children were abducted on March 20, 2007. The BCA received the complete request for the return of my children on July 13, 2007. The initial petition was filed on March 2, 2009. The question is: What happened during all this time? It took about 20 months to file a petition? The issue of the time that went by is being used against me...
 
The court finds that the children were illegaly removed from the USA, illegaly brought into Brazil, that I have legal custody of the children, and that the Brazilian custody orders may be null and void, although they want to first see the papers of the alleged Brazilian divorce done by Smadar.
 
The court decision says that because 2 years have already passed, they no longer have to return the children ... Article 12 is cited ...
 
They did request for all the children's passports to be confiscated so that Smadar does not move the children to another country.
 
The court decision also mentions Article 13 and that separating the children from their mother will cause psychological harm to the children...
 
I sent them a few questions and comments. I requested to talk to the AGU directly. In the past, I have been told that I cannot talk to the AGU because they are not representing me nor working for me.
 
From the beginning I have requested to the BCA and the USCA (US State Dept) that I want to communicate with my children. This issue is not even mentioned in the decision except for saying that since the children have been abducted for more than 2 years, it may not be in their best interest to be returned.
 
Also, the issue of child support is mentioned. I don't understand exactly if what they mean to say by that is that I have to pay child support for my abducted children?
 
I have been told in the past that if I travel to Brazil I will be arrested and put in jail until I agree to pay a large amount in child support. Has anybody else heard of this?
 
I have also been told that I may be arrested if I travel to Brazil and forced to sign papers giving away custody of my children to the abducting mother. Has anybody else heard of this?
 
In the meantime, I am not being allowed to contact my children and this fact is being used against me instead of against the abductor.
 
And all this despite the fact that I have by all accounts a "very strong" Hague case...
 
And one other thing: The preliminary decision was reached on March 11, 2009, it was faxed to the BCA on March 19, 2009. After contacting the BCA, I was told by email about this decision on April 1, 2009. I immediately requested to see a copy of these documents and I was told they could not send me a copy of the preliminary decision. In the end, these documents were faxed to the USCA until April 24, 2009. The Court also wanted to get additional information within 30 days of March 11, 2009, that's April 11, 2009. Do you see a problem here?
 
It seems to me that the AGU and the Brazilian Court are working very fast, but that the BCA retained the petition for the return of my children for a very long time. What do you think?
 
The last I heard from the BCA was in April 14 when they told me that: "In view of the high number of cases, and growing workload..." not to contact them again directly, only through the USCA.
 
As I said before I am not complaining about anything, just looking for your advice, opinions, and to let you know what happens during a very strong Hague case when the Brazilian Court had already accepted the fact that the abducting mother violated the laws of Brazil and the USA when she abducted the children to Brazil, and commited acts of fraud during the alleged Brazilian divorce, and does not have legal custody of the children...
 

[dmdaven2]

I think you need to document precisely the concerns you have based on dates and timing and get answers.

Hold these people accountable...make it known that the shady things involved in your case which don't make sense shall not be accepted without logical reasoning, and if no logical explanation is available then you need to strongly suggest they IMMEDIATELY return your child, which is CLEARLY stated in the Hague

That's be problem, it's not about other documents and he said she said...the Hague is...hey we have an abducted child, were they illegally brought here? If the answer is yes, the ONLY thing left to hear is if the defendant makes a complaint using  one of the factors enumerated in Article 12. If the defendant can't disprove that the child was habitually residing in the US, that you were exercising custody, your child is under 16, or prove that should the child return they'd be in GRAVE danger...then finito...case over...order the return of your child...PERIOD

[jl2saint]

Also, the issue of child support is mentioned. I don't understand exactly if what they mean to say by that is that I have to pay child support for my abducted children?
 
I have been told in the past that if I travel to Brazil I will be arrested and put in jail until I agree to pay a large amount in child support. Has anybody else heard of this?

Everybody has heard of it......

Helvecio Ribiero ignorantly spouted similar jargin on Larry King about David ( Haven't heard from OL Helvecio since that fiasco....lol.....He must have gotten fired for being the worlds worst family spokeman....)

And the sad part is, they actually think that you should........

[tweinstein]

The first problem is the issue of the dates. My children were abducted on March 20, 2007. The BCA received the complete request for the return of my children on July 13, 2007. The initial petition was filed on March 2, 2009. The question is: What happened during all this time? It took about 20 months to file a petition? The issue of the time that went by is being used against me...
It took 9 months to file my case. I have now been waiting since March 14, 2008 for a ruling. Kelvin Birotte's timeline is almost the same as mine.
 
The court decision says that because 2 years have already passed, they no longer have to return the children ... Article 12 is cited ...
 
They did request for all the children's passports to be confiscated so that Smadar does not move the children to another country.
 
The court decision also mentions Article 13 and that separating the children from their mother will cause psychological harm to the children...
 Read my latest article. This is standard practice.

I sent them a few questions and comments. I requested to talk to the AGU directly. In the past, I have been told that I cannot talk to the AGU because they are not representing me nor working for me.They are extremely overworked. I have spoken to them in the past, but most recently, they told me not to call. I think they genuinely want to help us, but when they get frustrated, they fall back on standard protocol.
 
Also, the issue of child support is mentioned. I don't understand exactly if what they mean to say by that is that I have to pay child support for my abducted children? This worries me. According to Article 16, custody or anything else can't be argued unless the court first declares that the children do not need to be returned. Now that this has occurred, I fear that she could go after you for child support.
 
I have been told in the past that if I travel to Brazil I will be arrested and put in jail until I agree to pay a large amount in child support. Has anybody else heard of this?Yes. This is exactly why I just petitioned the AGU to file a stay against the child support order. I guess the judge's lack of action is actually working on my behalf here. I don't have my children, but I'm also not paying child support to an abductor.  
 
I have also been told that I may be arrested if I travel to Brazil and forced to sign papers giving away custody of my children to the abducting mother. Has anybody else heard of this?Yes.
 
In the meantime, I am not being allowed to contact my children and this fact is being used against me instead of against the abductor.
 According to Patricia Lamego, the head of the BCA, this looks very poor for the abducting parent. I'm not sure how this is happening.
 
And one other thing: The preliminary decision was reached on March 11, 2009, it was faxed to the BCA on March 19, 2009. After contacting the BCA, I was told by email about this decision on April 1, 2009. I immediately requested to see a copy of these documents and I was told they could not send me a copy of the preliminary decision. In the end, these documents were faxed to the USCA until April 24, 2009. The Court also wanted to get additional information within 30 days of March 11, 2009, that's April 11, 2009. Do you see a problem here?Get used to it.
 
It seems to me that the AGU and the Brazilian Court are working very fast, but that the BCA retained the petition for the return of my children for a very long time. What do you think?The AGU is very competent.
 
The last I heard from the BCA was in April 14 when they told me that: "In view of the high number of cases, and growing workload..." not to contact them again directly, only through the USCA. They are inconsistent on this. At times they will speak to me, at times they won't.

[Dan_Plainview]

Here is an update on the case. After almost a month of phone calls and emails, I finally got a copy of the petition filed by the AGU, and the preliminary court decision.
 
I am posting this info here not to complain about anything going on there, but to get your opinions and advice, to know if you have seen anything like this before, and if not, just to let you know how things work when you have a very solid Hague case.
 
What I understood from the papers is because I speak Spanish but not Portuguese. The initial petition written by the AGU was very well written, no complaints with that.
 
The Court decision appears to be in my favor completely in regards to the Hague case itself, but there appear to be some indications of a few problems.
 
The first problem is the issue of the dates. My children were abducted on March 20, 2007. The BCA received the complete request for the return of my children on July 13, 2007. The initial petition was filed on March 2, 2009. The question is: What happened during all this time? It took about 20 months to file a petition? The issue of the time that went by is being used against me...
 
The court finds that the children were illegaly removed from the USA, illegaly brought into Brazil, that I have legal custody of the children, and that the Brazilian custody orders may be null and void, although they want to first see the papers of the alleged Brazilian divorce done by Smadar.
 
The court decision says that because 2 years have already passed, they no longer have to return the children ... Article 12 is cited ...
 
They did request for all the children's passports to be confiscated so that Smadar does not move the children to another country.
 
The court decision also mentions Article 13 and that separating the children from their mother will cause psychological harm to the children...
 
I sent them a few questions and comments. I requested to talk to the AGU directly. In the past, I have been told that I cannot talk to the AGU because they are not representing me nor working for me.
 
From the beginning I have requested to the BCA and the USCA (US State Dept) that I want to communicate with my children. This issue is not even mentioned in the decision except for saying that since the children have been abducted for more than 2 years, it may not be in their best interest to be returned.
 
Also, the issue of child support is mentioned. I don't understand exactly if what they mean to say by that is that I have to pay child support for my abducted children?
 
I have been told in the past that if I travel to Brazil I will be arrested and put in jail until I agree to pay a large amount in child support. Has anybody else heard of this?
 
I have also been told that I may be arrested if I travel to Brazil and forced to sign papers giving away custody of my children to the abducting mother. Has anybody else heard of this?
 
In the meantime, I am not being allowed to contact my children and this fact is being used against me instead of against the abductor.
 
And all this despite the fact that I have by all accounts a "very strong" Hague case...
 
And one other thing: The preliminary decision was reached on March 11, 2009, it was faxed to the BCA on March 19, 2009. After contacting the BCA, I was told by email about this decision on April 1, 2009. I immediately requested to see a copy of these documents and I was told they could not send me a copy of the preliminary decision. In the end, these documents were faxed to the USCA until April 24, 2009. The Court also wanted to get additional information within 30 days of March 11, 2009, that's April 11, 2009. Do you see a problem here?
 
It seems to me that the AGU and the Brazilian Court are working very fast, but that the BCA retained the petition for the return of my children for a very long time. What do you think?
 
The last I heard from the BCA was in April 14 when they told me that: "In view of the high number of cases, and growing workload..." not to contact them again directly, only through the USCA.
 
As I said before I am not complaining about anything, just looking for your advice, opinions, and to let you know what happens during a very strong Hague case when the Brazilian Court had already accepted the fact that the abducting mother violated the laws of Brazil and the USA when she abducted the children to Brazil, and commited acts of fraud during the alleged Brazilian divorce, and does not have legal custody of the children...
 

This seems very odd. My advice is to have someone you can trust take the time to give you an accurate translation of both the filing and the "decision".
 
The odd part is all the reference to divorce, separation, custody and child support. To my knowledge these are family court issues not federal court. Are you sure that they weren't putting a stay on something the abductor had running in family court?
 
I'm also pretty sure the TP (abductor) can't divorce you in Brasil until two years has passed (maybe it has) ... and then only in Brasilia (that is if you were married in the US).
 
It also seems that if you were to go to Brasil, before you could be put in jail for failure to make child support you would at least need to be served and given some notice to appear. Certainly could be wrong on this ...

[hatufim.org]

I am still waiting for the translation, but some very interesting facts were determined by the Brazilian autorities:
 
1.- The children were wrongfully removed from Florida.
2.- The children were wrongfully taken into Brazil.
 
The explanation given is simply that Smadar Hameiry did not have her husband's permission or the permission of the Florida Court to take the children from Florida to Brazil.
 
Also, the Brazilian authorities have determined that:
 
3.- The Florida divorce and Florida custody orders are valid in Brazil.
4.- The Brazilian divorce and Brazilian custody orders, secretly obtained by Smadar Hameiry, were obtained fraudulently, illegally, and are null and void.
 
Despite the above, the Brazilian Court says that the children cannot be separated from their mother as this may cause psychological damage to the children, and also that I should be paying child support.
 
It should be noted that no one has ever said that they want to separate the children from their mother. The objective is to allow the children to communicate with their father in addition to their mother. Also, it's more than obvious that having the children abducted is bad for the children.
 
In short, I won my Hague case, but still, there is no sign that the Brazilian authorities will return my children. Also, the Brazilian authorities have refused in assisting me in communicating with my children over the phone or internet. And of course, have made it impossible for me to visit my children in Brazil.
 
Now what am I supposed to do?