Bring Sean Home Forums

Goldman Forums => Main Forum (Goldman) => Topic started by: LukieD on June 10, 2009, 09:04:04 AM

Title: Coverage of Supreme Court hearing-DON'T POST UNLESS YOU ARE WATCHING THE HEARING
Post by: LukieD on June 10, 2009, 09:04:04 AM
http://www.tvjustica.jus.br/assista_online.php
 
Post your comments throughout the day on this thread.
Title: Re: Coverage of Supreme Court hearing
Post by: alleycat on June 10, 2009, 11:41:30 AM
Quote from: LukieD;30957
http://www.tvjustica.jus.br/assista_online.php
 
Post your comments throughout the day on this thread.

Hi lukie,
what time does this start?
Title: Re: Coverage of Supreme Court hearing
Post by: jl2saint on June 10, 2009, 11:43:39 AM
Quote from: alleycat;31067
Hi lukie,
what time does this start?

Brasilia is an hour ahead.....and the last I saw said 2 o'clock there.....so it should be 3 here on the east coast....?
Title: Re: Coverage of Supreme Court hearing
Post by: rlw.mom on June 10, 2009, 11:51:45 AM
It was reported --
 
"The hearing starts at 1:00 eastern time here in the US."
Title: Re: Coverage of Supreme Court hearing
Post by: Genenut on June 10, 2009, 11:53:39 AM
Quote from: jl2saint;31071
Brasilia is an hour ahead.....and the last I saw said 2 o'clock there.....so it should be 3 here on the east coast....?

Hour ahead so 2pm there is 1pm EST....just one more hour to go ... start the tums/pepcid/rolaids pills now I'd say ....
Title: Re: Coverage of Supreme Court hearing
Post by: katie on June 10, 2009, 11:54:16 AM
I can't open the attached link.  Will someone be posting real time updates?
Title: Re: Coverage of Supreme Court hearing
Post by: Teena on June 10, 2009, 11:55:03 AM
Quote from: jl2saint;31071
Brasilia is an hour ahead.....and the last I saw said 2 o'clock there.....so it should be 3 here on the east coast....?
they are an hour ahead of us east coasters
Title: Re: Coverage of Supreme Court hearing
Post by: jl2saint on June 10, 2009, 12:00:07 PM
Quote from: Teena;31090
they are an hour ahead of us east coasters

Now I'm the bafoon......lol

I need a vaction.......
Title: Re: Coverage of Supreme Court hearing
Post by: Teena on June 10, 2009, 12:02:42 PM
Is the media player on this link supposed to be blank right now?
Title: Re: Coverage of Supreme Court hearing
Post by: alleycat on June 10, 2009, 12:03:03 PM
I am pacific standard time..... 12 my time?
Title: Re: Coverage of Supreme Court hearing
Post by: Teena on June 10, 2009, 12:03:27 PM
Quote from: jl2saint;31095
Now I'm the bafoon......lol

I need a vaction.......
No you are not! I just found that out yesterday.:nixweiss:
Title: Re: Coverage of Supreme Court hearing
Post by: Genenut on June 10, 2009, 12:06:45 PM
Quote from: alleycat;31099
I am pacific standard time..... 12 my time?

I think for you it will be 10am your local time... I'm not good when its more than an hour diff to calculate either way... when I lived in Japan we routinely woke people up with our phone calls ....
Title: Re: Coverage of Supreme Court hearing
Post by: clowermom on June 10, 2009, 12:08:45 PM
I believe it works out like this:
1pm Eastern
12pm Central
11am Mountain
10am Pacific

I'm not sure of any other time zones. Hope this helps.
Title: Re: Coverage of Supreme Court hearing
Post by: mfer on June 10, 2009, 12:09:05 PM
Quote from: alleycat;31099
I am pacific standard time..... 12 my time?

10 am our time.
Title: Re: Coverage of Supreme Court hearing
Post by: Ceilli on June 10, 2009, 12:09:31 PM
Quote from: Genenut;31105
I think for you it will be 10am your local time... I'm not good when its more than an hour diff to calculate either way... when I lived in Japan we routinely woke people up with our phone calls ....

http://www.timeanddate.com/worldclock/
Title: Re: Coverage of Supreme Court hearing
Post by: whartn on June 10, 2009, 12:10:55 PM
Is David in Rio or Brasilia? I would image he is in Rio awaiting custody of Sean.JP will address STF after decision doing his mea culpas.I will do anything for Sean.The LeS are in damage control.
Nonna is the evil one--cost the LeS much Reals.I am still amazed the older gents put up with her.
Title: Re: Coverage of Supreme Court hearing
Post by: sergiocesar on June 10, 2009, 12:13:07 PM
Quote from: clowermom;31106
I believe it works out like this:
1pm Eastern
12pm Central
11am Mountain
10am Pacific

I'm not sure of any other time zones. Hope this helps.
Looks good... has anyone been able to see a live feed? I get nothing but black screen.:cloud::mad2::burn:
Title: Re: Coverage of Supreme Court hearing
Post by: Teena on June 10, 2009, 12:15:11 PM
Quote from: sergiocesar;31113
Looks good... has anyone been able to see a live feed? I get nothing but black screen.:cloud::mad2::burn:
Me too
Title: Re: Coverage of Supreme Court hearing
Post by: M.Capestro on June 10, 2009, 12:21:02 PM
Quote from: sergiocesar;31113
Looks good... has anyone been able to see a live feed? I get nothing but black screen.:cloud::mad2::burn:

I don't think they'll start streaming until the court starts its session.
Title: Re: Coverage of Supreme Court hearing
Post by: Teena on June 10, 2009, 12:21:49 PM
Quote from: M.Capestro;31119
I don't think they'll start streaming until the court starts its session.
Thanks M. I thought it was just me.
Title: Re: Coverage of Supreme Court hearing
Post by: betsy on June 10, 2009, 12:24:46 PM
Teena - my media player was blank too so I assumed something was wrong with the connection because at home last night, I was able to see the actual website and I can't here at work.?
Title: Re: Coverage of Supreme Court hearing
Post by: teebee on June 10, 2009, 12:24:46 PM
The anticipation is brutal... Can't wait until something appears on the screen.
Title: Re: Coverage of Supreme Court hearing
Post by: Sandra on June 10, 2009, 12:25:37 PM
Quote from: M.Capestro;31119
I don't think they'll start streaming until the court starts its session.

This link: http://www.radiojustica.jus.br with Explorer. It doesn't work with Firefox. It is already on with some other subject.
Title: Re: Coverage of Supreme Court hearing
Post by: Bob D'Amico on June 10, 2009, 12:33:37 PM
Quote from: whartn;31111
Is David in Rio or Brasilia? I would image he is in Rio awaiting custody of Sean.JP will address STF after decision doing his mea culpas.

DAVID AND HIS ATTORNEY RICARDO ZAMARIOLA ARE IN BRASILIA AND WILL BE PRESENT AT THE SUPREME COURT HEARING.

THREE CASES ARE BEING HEARD TODAY BY THE SUPREME COURT. WE DO NOT KNOW IN WHICH ORDER THEY WILL BE PRESENTED.

NOR DO WE KNOW IF THE COURT WILL ISSUE AN IMMEDIATE RULING - WE CAN ONLY HOPE THEY DO.
Title: Re: Coverage of Supreme Court hearing
Post by: caique mateus on June 10, 2009, 12:38:53 PM
It's in orkut, posted by Priscila:
 
There was a "chamada" in channel justice:
 
"bom, eles foram imparciais.
apensas transmitiram o recado.
e expicaram que o min. Marco Aurélio não defende que o garoto deva ficar com padastro, apenas defende que ele deve ser mantido aqui no Brasil até que o processo seja julgado em última instância (que é esse julgamento de hoje, eu acho)"
 
Minister Marco Aurélio does not say that Sean should stay with his stepfather. He just says Sean should stay in Brazil until the last instance.
Title: Re: Coverage of Supreme Court hearing
Post by: NJMomma on June 10, 2009, 12:43:18 PM
Will someone be updating the forum live?
 
 
 
 
Stacey
Title: Re: Coverage of Supreme Court hearing
Post by: dana on June 10, 2009, 12:46:28 PM
Quote from: caiqueemateus;31138
It's in orkut, posted by Priscila:
 
There was a "chamada" in channel justice:
 
"bom, eles foram imparciais.
apensas transmitiram o recado.
e expicaram que o min. Marco Aurélio não defende que o garoto deva ficar com padastro, apenas defende que ele deve ser mantido aqui no Brasil até que o processo seja julgado em última instância (que é esse julgamento de hoje, eu acho)"
 
Minister Marco Aurélio does not say that Sean should stay with his stepfather. He just says Sean should stay in Brazil until the last instance.

Please correct me if I am thinking this wrong--
 
STF rules under/for the HC - then it is not a custody case, so why are they allowing appeals?  I need some Valium.  My nerves are shot!!!
Title: Re: Coverage of Supreme Court hearing
Post by: caique mateus on June 10, 2009, 12:46:58 PM
I think some of us will try.
 
I'll try... my english is limited, I don't have access to TV Justice (not sure internet wil work. So far....) and I don't understand technical legal things, but let's try!
Title: Re: Coverage of Supreme Court hearing
Post by: rcgracia on June 10, 2009, 12:47:40 PM
Let's pray for a miracle!!
Title: Re: Coverage of Supreme Court hearing
Post by: caique mateus on June 10, 2009, 12:48:49 PM
Quote from: dana;31143
Please correct me if I am thinking this wrong--
 
STF rules under/for the HC - then it is not a custody case, so why are they allowing appeals? I need some Valium. My nerves are shot!!!

Maybe one of our lawyers can enlight us. But it seemed to me they say they will not discuss the custody but just where Sean should stay until the last possibel appeal.
Title: Re: Coverage of Supreme Court hearing
Post by: sue on June 10, 2009, 12:49:32 PM
Bob, what going on with all the deleted posts?
Title: Re: Coverage of Supreme Court hearing
Post by: Amazee on June 10, 2009, 12:49:33 PM
I am praying for the law to be upheld that this father gets to raise his son in on American soil.
Title: Re: Coverage of Supreme Court hearing
Post by: sue on June 10, 2009, 12:52:07 PM
If they do rule he belongs with his dad, but can't leave Brazil, will they at least turn him over to David?
Title: Re: Coverage of Supreme Court hearing
Post by: momofthree on June 10, 2009, 12:53:01 PM
Quote from: dana;31143
Please correct me if I am thinking this wrong--
 
STF rules under/for the HC - then it is not a custody case, so why are they allowing appeals?  I need some Valium.  My nerves are shot!!!


I agree - what appeals if they go for the HC?? Then any appeals should be in New Jersey courts!
Title: Re: Coverage of Supreme Court hearing
Post by: dmdaven2 on June 10, 2009, 12:54:03 PM
Quote from: gail;31154
If they do rule he belongs with his dad, but can't leave Brazil, will they at least turn him over to David?

 
They should, that'd be the best thing to do just to be on the safe side...
Title: Re: Coverage of Supreme Court hearing
Post by: liesl78 on June 10, 2009, 12:54:31 PM
Everyone, since the coverage hasn't started, can we please post comments here for now:
http://bringseanhome.org/forum/showthread.php?t=1417
 
Thanks!
Title: Re: Coverage of Supreme Court hearing
Post by: Bob D'Amico on June 10, 2009, 12:54:47 PM
Quote from: gail;31151
Bob, what going on with all the deleted posts?

LET'S ALL TRY TO KEEP THIS THIS THREAD ON TOPIC AND AVOID IRRELEVANT AND CONFUSING CHATTER.
Title: Re: Coverage of Supreme Court hearing
Post by: naiarax on June 10, 2009, 12:55:49 PM
Hi guys!  I'm from Brasilia but live in Pittsburgh... I will try to watch it and see if I can post some updates... It all depends on how long my twin girls take a nap for!  :o)
Title: Re: Coverage of Supreme Court hearing
Post by: jl2saint on June 10, 2009, 12:59:15 PM
Quote from: LukieD;30957
http://www.tvjustica.jus.br/assista_online.php
 
Post your comments throughout the day on this thread.
Is anyone getting anything other than a black screen?

Will it start at 1?:madgo:
Title: Re: Coverage of Supreme Court hearing
Post by: liesl78 on June 10, 2009, 01:01:29 PM
I'm not being able to hear the radio or see the screen... :(
Title: Re: Coverage of Supreme Court hearing
Post by: vivienne on June 10, 2009, 01:02:06 PM
I can't see anything either.:nixweiss:
Title: Re: Coverage of Supreme Court hearing
Post by: kathy on June 10, 2009, 01:02:42 PM
me neither i get nothing a white screen that says i believe asissta online
Title: Re: Coverage of Supreme Court hearing
Post by: dana on June 10, 2009, 01:02:53 PM
me either ~
Title: Re: Coverage of Supreme Court hearing
Post by: NJMomma on June 10, 2009, 01:02:57 PM
I can not either
Title: Re: Coverage of Supreme Court hearing
Post by: mgs2510 on June 10, 2009, 01:03:11 PM
It's offline now. This start at 2:00.
Title: Re: Coverage of Supreme Court hearing
Post by: rcgracia on June 10, 2009, 01:03:24 PM
Quote from: liesl78;31165
I'm not being able to hear the radio or see the screen... :(

Me too:frown:
Title: Re: Coverage of Supreme Court hearing
Post by: Teena on June 10, 2009, 01:03:32 PM
Quote from: jl2saint;31164
Is anyone getting anything other than a black screen?
 
Will it start at 1?:madgo:

Quote from: liesl78;31165
I'm not being able to hear the radio or see the screen... :(

Brazilian justice system is slooow ...remember? Maybe there has been a delay. Can ANYONE see anything?
 
Only post if you see anything. Bob doesn't want to crowd up the thread with unneccessary posts.
Title: Re: Coverage of Supreme Court hearing
Post by: mgs2510 on June 10, 2009, 01:03:49 PM
More links to watch:
http://www.direitodoestado.com.br/tvjustica.asp (http://www.direitodoestado.com.br/tvjustica.asp)
http://www.tvjustica.com.br/tvjustica.asp (http://www.tvjustica.com.br/tvjustica.asp)
http://www.tvtuga.com/content/view/121/253/ (http://www.tvtuga.com/content/view/121/253/)
Title: Re: Coverage of Supreme Court hearing
Post by: Lola on June 10, 2009, 01:04:05 PM
its beginning
Title: Re: Coverage of Supreme Court hearing
Post by: Herb Wife on June 10, 2009, 01:04:12 PM
I do not see anything on link...????
Title: Re: Coverage of Supreme Court hearing
Post by: kathy on June 10, 2009, 01:04:48 PM
Thanks mgs2510 i guess were all getting impatient can you see
Title: Re: Coverage of Supreme Court hearing
Post by: Grace on June 10, 2009, 01:04:53 PM
Me neither-black screen and no audio on radio.
 
I wil keep an eye on the Brazilian forums like the BSH at Orkut, maybe someone there is able to see it there on TV.
Title: Re: Coverage of Supreme Court hearing
Post by: Atlantic965 on June 10, 2009, 01:06:04 PM
I tried accessing direct from the main site and it appears to have too many people on watching and the server cannot take anymore.  :burn:Why am I seeing in my mind a certain lawyer who shall remain nameless screwing up the transmission ?
 
 
 
 
 
 
Quote from: Teena;31173
Brazilian justice system is slooow ...remember? Maybe there has been a delay. Can ANYONE see anything?
Title: Re: Coverage of Supreme Court hearing
Post by: Lola on June 10, 2009, 01:06:13 PM
for the moment they are talking about another subject.
Title: Re: Coverage of Supreme Court hearing
Post by: bgailey on June 10, 2009, 01:06:41 PM
I'm been setting hear all morning looking everywhere online you could possibly think for some kind of coverage. I'm not having any luck.
Title: Re: Coverage of Supreme Court hearing
Post by: Lola on June 10, 2009, 01:07:59 PM
Grace. im in brasil, watching TV justica, i can try to tell you what happen (sorry for bad english)
Title: Re: Coverage of Supreme Court hearing
Post by: TraceyB on June 10, 2009, 01:08:54 PM
I can't get anything either....
Title: Re: Coverage of Supreme Court hearing
Post by: Irish17 on June 10, 2009, 01:09:40 PM
Lola anyone who is watching the proceedings, please keep typing and letting us know what is going on.
Title: Re: Coverage of Supreme Court hearing
Post by: cindy85 on June 10, 2009, 01:10:23 PM
they are now talking about the case
Title: Re: Coverage of Supreme Court hearing
Post by: dmdaven2 on June 10, 2009, 01:10:33 PM
I assume they will be speaking in portuguese? Maybe one person who has the coverage can give "play by play" updates...and this thread be posted in by that person only, that way people can refresh this thread and see exactly what's happening instead having to scramble through other posts...
Title: Re: Coverage of Supreme Court hearing
Post by: Lola on June 10, 2009, 01:10:56 PM
they are talking about the case now.
Title: Re: Coverage of Supreme Court hearing
Post by: Grace on June 10, 2009, 01:11:27 PM
Brazilians in Brazil, please post here what is going on, even in Portuguese. The video says "connecting to media" but nothing happens.
Title: Re: Coverage of Supreme Court hearing
Post by: Teena on June 10, 2009, 01:12:25 PM
A LOT OF PEOPLE CANNOT WATCH THIS FOR SOME REASON (INCLUDING ME). pLEASE DO NOT POST UNLESS YOU HAVE SOMETHING TO ADD RELATED TO TODAYS HEARING. IE. PEOPLE WHO CAN SEE THE COVERAGE CAN REPORT WHAT IS GOING ON.
 
THANKS
Title: Re: Coverage of Supreme Court hearing
Post by: Lola on June 10, 2009, 01:12:41 PM
if you guy's want I can try to keep you inform of what's happening??
Title: Re: Coverage of Supreme Court hearing
Post by: cindy85 on June 10, 2009, 01:13:04 PM
they are talking about sean being as brasilian as american,..
does not matter where he was born, because his mother is brasilian
Title: Re: Coverage of Supreme Court hearing
Post by: Teena on June 10, 2009, 01:13:14 PM
Quote from: Lola;31194
if you guy's want I can try to keep you inform of what's happening??
YES PLEASE!
Title: Re: Coverage of Supreme Court hearing
Post by: bgailey on June 10, 2009, 01:13:58 PM
Quote from: cindy85;31188
they are now talking about the case
Everyone please pray
Title: Re: Coverage of Supreme Court hearing
Post by: maggiemg17 on June 10, 2009, 01:15:07 PM
Quote from: bgailey;31198
Everyone please pray

I'm saying a prayer right now...
Title: Re: Coverage of Supreme Court hearing
Post by: jl2saint on June 10, 2009, 01:15:09 PM
Quote from: Lola;31194
if you guy's want I can try to keep you inform of what's happening??

 
YES!!!!!!!
Title: Re: Coverage of Supreme Court hearing
Post by: Lola on June 10, 2009, 01:15:54 PM
for the moment it's advertisement (one more time sorry for my bad english)
Title: Re: Coverage of Supreme Court hearing
Post by: Teena on June 10, 2009, 01:16:18 PM
Quote from: cindy85;31195
they are talking about sean being as brasilian as american,..
does not matter where he was born, because his mother is brasilian
Who is "they"?
Title: Re: Coverage of Supreme Court hearing
Post by: Herb Wife on June 10, 2009, 01:16:29 PM
I cannot see anything, only hear...who's doing the updates please?
 
Praying hard!
Title: Re: Coverage of Supreme Court hearing
Post by: Bob D'Amico on June 10, 2009, 01:18:40 PM
IT APPEARS THAT THE VIDEO FEED IS ONLY BEING DISPLAYED WITHIN BRAZIL, BLOCKING OUT THE USA.

PLEASE DO NOT POST HERE UNLESS YOU ARE WATCHING THE VIDEO LIVE AND WANT TO TELL US WHAT IS HAPPENING.
Title: Re: Coverage of Supreme Court hearing
Post by: Lola on June 10, 2009, 01:20:11 PM
still nothing about sean case. the session hasn't begin.
Title: Re: Coverage of Supreme Court hearing
Post by: cindy85 on June 10, 2009, 01:20:35 PM
Quote from: Teena;31205
Who is "they"?

this TV justice presents itself as journalisms..
so 2 journalists were talking about the agenda today
and then they said that Seans case is complicated
that the boy is native born brasilian (brasileiro nato) as he is also american
Title: Re: Coverage of Supreme Court hearing
Post by: mgs2510 on June 10, 2009, 01:21:56 PM
No, I belive it's because too many people are watching. Have people who live outside Brazil watching and reporting in Orkut.
Title: Re: Coverage of Supreme Court hearing-DON'T POST UNLESS YOU ARE WATCHING THE HEA
Post by: FC_Florida on June 10, 2009, 01:23:43 PM
I can't access both TV Justica and Radio Justica. Doesn't work! !!Will try DirectTV radio...
Title: Re: Coverage of Supreme Court hearing-DON'T POST UNLESS YOU ARE WATCHING THE HEA
Post by: Lola on June 10, 2009, 01:24:27 PM
update : It hasn't begin yet.
Title: Re: Coverage of Supreme Court hearing-DON'T POST UNLESS YOU ARE WATCHING THE HEA
Post by: Lola on June 10, 2009, 01:31:11 PM
The session is beginning.
Title: Re: Coverage of Supreme Court hearing-DON'T POST UNLESS YOU ARE WATCHING THE HEA
Post by: cindy85 on June 10, 2009, 01:31:18 PM
its going to start now!!!
Title: Re: Coverage of Supreme Court hearing-DON'T POST UNLESS YOU ARE WATCHING THE HEA
Post by: caique mateus on June 10, 2009, 01:31:39 PM
Try this:
 
http://www.radiojustica.jus.br/oucaAgora/index.php
 
Press F5 (than play) to update until it works.
Title: Re: Coverage of Supreme Court hearing-DON'T POST UNLESS YOU ARE WATCHING THE HEA
Post by: Lola on June 10, 2009, 01:31:50 PM
o jpls esta la.
Title: Re: Coverage of Supreme Court hearing-DON'T POST UNLESS YOU ARE WATCHING THE HEA
Post by: Lola on June 10, 2009, 01:32:11 PM
we can see david too.
Title: Re: Coverage of Supreme Court hearing-DON'T POST UNLESS YOU ARE WATCHING THE HEA
Post by: Lola on June 10, 2009, 01:32:36 PM
marco aurelio esta falando
Title: Re: Coverage of Supreme Court hearing-DON'T POST UNLESS YOU ARE WATCHING THE HEA
Post by: naiarax on June 10, 2009, 01:32:55 PM
David's case is on now
Title: Re: Coverage of Supreme Court hearing-DON'T POST UNLESS YOU ARE WATCHING THE HEA
Post by: Lola on June 10, 2009, 01:33:10 PM
marco aurelio is talking, he is defending his decision
Title: Re: Coverage of Supreme Court hearing-DON'T POST UNLESS YOU ARE WATCHING THE HEA
Post by: Davis1 on June 10, 2009, 01:33:13 PM
Lola or ms2510
Voces podem enviar o link que voces estao vendo, quem sabe estamos com o link errado.
 
Can you send the link you are watching, maybe we have the wrong link.
Thanks
Obrigada pelos updates - Thanks for the updates
Title: Re: Coverage of Supreme Court hearing-DON'T POST UNLESS YOU ARE WATCHING THE HEA
Post by: André Felipe on June 10, 2009, 01:33:17 PM
this case is already bein analysed now.
Title: Re: Coverage of Supreme Court hearing-DON'T POST UNLESS YOU ARE WATCHING THE HEA
Post by: FC_Florida on June 10, 2009, 01:33:46 PM
still no audio and no picture
Title: Re: Coverage of Supreme Court hearing-DON'T POST UNLESS YOU ARE WATCHING THE HEA
Post by: chicybaby on June 10, 2009, 01:34:41 PM
F5 and play worked can hear now
Title: Re: Coverage of Supreme Court hearing-DON'T POST UNLESS YOU ARE WATCHING THE HEA
Post by: André Felipe on June 10, 2009, 01:35:24 PM
Marco Aurelio is making a summary about what happened and about the PP´s arguments.
Title: Re: Coverage of Supreme Court hearing-DON'T POST UNLESS YOU ARE WATCHING THE HEA
Post by: Herb Wife on June 10, 2009, 01:35:33 PM
http://www.radiojustica.jus.br/programa/verPrograma.php?seq_programa_radio=53#
 
 try this....Im able to listen
Title: Re: Coverage of Supreme Court hearing-DON'T POST UNLESS YOU ARE WATCHING THE HEA
Post by: Lola on June 10, 2009, 01:36:38 PM
sorry davis1, im in brazil watching this on tv I'm not watching on internet.
Title: Re: Coverage of Supreme Court hearing-DON'T POST UNLESS YOU ARE WATCHING THE HEA
Post by: Lola on June 10, 2009, 01:37:06 PM
Marco aurelio says that sean must stay in barzil
Title: Re: Coverage of Supreme Court hearing-DON'T POST UNLESS YOU ARE WATCHING THE HEA
Post by: naiarax on June 10, 2009, 01:38:40 PM
Saying that Sean showed wishies on staying in Brazil and that the Hague Conv says that it should take into consideration the child's wishes
Title: Re: Coverage of Supreme Court hearing-DON'T POST UNLESS YOU ARE WATCHING THE HEA
Post by: Lola on June 10, 2009, 01:38:59 PM
sorry guys this is a very technical speech so I'm just gonna resume what they are saying because it is too difficukt to translate everything on live
Title: Re: Coverage of Supreme Court hearing-DON'T POST UNLESS YOU ARE WATCHING THE HEA
Post by: Teena on June 10, 2009, 01:39:46 PM
Quote from: Lola;31240
sorry guys this is a very technical speech so I'm just gonna resume what they are saying because it is too difficukt to translate everything on live
you are doing fine
Title: Re: Coverage of Supreme Court hearing-DON'T POST UNLESS YOU ARE WATCHING THE HEA
Post by: cma on June 10, 2009, 01:39:49 PM
Thank you so much Lola!
Title: Re: Coverage of Supreme Court hearing-DON'T POST UNLESS YOU ARE WATCHING THE HEA
Post by: FC_Florida on June 10, 2009, 01:39:54 PM
not working on my end here
Title: Re: Coverage of Supreme Court hearing-DON'T POST UNLESS YOU ARE WATCHING THE HEA
Post by: André Felipe on June 10, 2009, 01:40:05 PM
Quote from: PeterThomas;31233
Can someone please translate into English what is being said.

I am not fluent in english.
When the Ministers starts to make their decisions (votes) about the case, I will try to make a sumary about what each one of them said.
 
Within a few days, everythin that has been said today will be published at STF´s website, and then, BSH will provide a translation for that.
Title: Re: Coverage of Supreme Court hearing-DON'T POST UNLESS YOU ARE WATCHING THE HEA
Post by: caique mateus on June 10, 2009, 01:40:18 PM
He was reading's PP's document, no?
Title: Re: Coverage of Supreme Court hearing-DON'T POST UNLESS YOU ARE WATCHING THE HEA
Post by: caique mateus on June 10, 2009, 01:41:16 PM
No, he is reading his "sentence" suspending judge's Pinto decision
Title: Re: Coverage of Supreme Court hearing-DON'T POST UNLESS YOU ARE WATCHING THE HEA
Post by: rcgracia on June 10, 2009, 01:42:05 PM
Quote from: Herb Wife;31234
http://www.radiojustica.jus.br/programa/verPrograma.php?seq_programa_radio=53#
 
try this....Im able to listen

Thank you Herb Wife, I finally got working!!
Title: Re: Coverage of Supreme Court hearing-DON'T POST UNLESS YOU ARE WATCHING THE HEA
Post by: naiarax on June 10, 2009, 01:42:25 PM
He is defending the dignity, respect and living with the family.
Title: Re: Coverage of Supreme Court hearing-DON'T POST UNLESS YOU ARE WATCHING THE HEA
Post by: Lola on June 10, 2009, 01:42:53 PM
update: marco aurelio still talking. Saying sean has right to choose where he wants to live.
Title: Re: Coverage of Supreme Court hearing-DON'T POST UNLESS YOU ARE WATCHING THE HEA
Post by: naiarax on June 10, 2009, 01:43:04 PM
He defends Sean's wishes should be heard
Title: Re: Coverage of Supreme Court hearing-DON'T POST UNLESS YOU ARE WATCHING THE HEA
Post by: caique mateus on June 10, 2009, 01:43:38 PM
Now he is talking about a past case when the child was listen as to where he/she wanted to stay
Title: Re: Coverage of Supreme Court hearing-DON'T POST UNLESS YOU ARE WATCHING THE HEA
Post by: naiarax on June 10, 2009, 01:44:10 PM
He is talking about a jurisprudencia.... A Case dated in 1992
Title: Re: Coverage of Supreme Court hearing-DON'T POST UNLESS YOU ARE WATCHING THE HEA
Post by: naiarax on June 10, 2009, 01:45:41 PM
Sean said "whatever", right? It doesn matter??? He is saying he SAID he WANTS o stay with the maternal family
Title: Re: Coverage of Supreme Court hearing-DON'T POST UNLESS YOU ARE WATCHING THE HEA
Post by: André Felipe on June 10, 2009, 01:45:53 PM
the Union´s attorney, JPLS and David requested to make a speech, so the Ministers will only make their votes after all these speechs, i think
Title: Re: Coverage of Supreme Court hearing-DON'T POST UNLESS YOU ARE WATCHING THE HEA
Post by: Lola on June 10, 2009, 01:46:33 PM
Marco aurelio is saying Haia can't work in that case
Title: Re: Coverage of Supreme Court hearing-DON'T POST UNLESS YOU ARE WATCHING THE HEA
Post by: rcgracia on June 10, 2009, 01:46:36 PM
It's not working!!!:burn:
Title: Re: Coverage of Supreme Court hearing-DON'T POST UNLESS YOU ARE WATCHING THE HEA
Post by: Câmara on June 10, 2009, 01:48:23 PM
Quote from: rcgracia;31257
It's not working!!!:burn:

Doesn't work for me either :( I am so upset!!!
Title: Re: Coverage of Supreme Court hearing-DON'T POST UNLESS YOU ARE WATCHING THE HEA
Post by: André Felipe on June 10, 2009, 01:48:23 PM
Quote from: Lola;31256
Marco aurelio is saying Haia can't work in that case

he is reading his previous (preliminary) decision. It´s not his final opinion, yet.
Title: Re: Coverage of Supreme Court hearing-DON'T POST UNLESS YOU ARE WATCHING THE HEA
Post by: sonia on June 10, 2009, 01:48:34 PM
does anyone can access it i can't
Title: Re: Coverage of Supreme Court hearing-DON'T POST UNLESS YOU ARE WATCHING THE HEA
Post by: bgailey on June 10, 2009, 01:50:13 PM
Wow this has got my heart pumping please keep giving us any info you can
Title: Re: Coverage of Supreme Court hearing-DON'T POST UNLESS YOU ARE WATCHING THE HEA
Post by: Lola on June 10, 2009, 01:50:24 PM
Sorry andre, its too technical for me...
Title: Re: Coverage of Supreme Court hearing-DON'T POST UNLESS YOU ARE WATCHING THE HEA
Post by: heatheram29 on June 10, 2009, 01:50:35 PM
IT CAN ONLY BE ACCESSED IF YOU'RE IN BRAZIL. PLEASE DON'T POST UNLESS YOU ARE WATCHING/LISTENING AND HAVE UPDATES. THANKS
Title: Re: Coverage of Supreme Court hearing-DON'T POST UNLESS YOU ARE WATCHING THE HEA
Post by: Lola on June 10, 2009, 01:50:43 PM
thank you for helping
Title: Re: Coverage of Supreme Court hearing-DON'T POST UNLESS YOU ARE WATCHING THE HEA
Post by: naiarax on June 10, 2009, 01:51:12 PM
The dignity of the minor should surpress the Federal Constituion, HC and UN Child's right
Title: Re: Coverage of Supreme Court hearing-DON'T POST UNLESS YOU ARE WATCHING THE HEA
Post by: LukieD on June 10, 2009, 01:51:14 PM
post in portuguese if you have to, that's better than nothing!
Title: Re: Coverage of Supreme Court hearing-DON'T POST UNLESS YOU ARE WATCHING THE HEA
Post by: cindy85 on June 10, 2009, 01:51:11 PM
the attorney of PP is now talking
Title: Re: Coverage of Supreme Court hearing-DON'T POST UNLESS YOU ARE WATCHING THE HEA
Post by: André Felipe on June 10, 2009, 01:51:24 PM
Quote from: Lola;31262
Sorry andre, its too technical for me...

 
yeah, but he wrote in a way that indicates he will vote for Sean´s stays, i think.
 
Now, the PP´s attorney is speaking.
Title: Re: Coverage of Supreme Court hearing-DON'T POST UNLESS YOU ARE WATCHING THE HEA
Post by: caique mateus on June 10, 2009, 01:51:31 PM
Im not in Brazil and I can access the radio.
 
Now PP is talking
Title: Re: Coverage of Supreme Court hearing
Post by: Teena on June 10, 2009, 01:51:36 PM
Quote from: Bob D'Amico;31208
IT APPEARS THAT THE VIDEO FEED IS ONLY BEING DISPLAYED WITHIN BRAZIL, BLOCKING OUT THE USA.
 
PLEASE DO NOT POST HERE UNLESS YOU ARE WATCHING THE VIDEO LIVE AND WANT TO TELL US WHAT IS HAPPENING.
REMINDER
Title: Re: Coverage of Supreme Court hearing-DON'T POST UNLESS YOU ARE WATCHING THE HEA
Post by: naiarax on June 10, 2009, 01:51:38 PM
Im in Pittsburgh and listening it
Title: Re: Coverage of Supreme Court hearing-DON'T POST UNLESS YOU ARE WATCHING THE HEA
Post by: cindy85 on June 10, 2009, 01:51:56 PM
the guy was not the lawyer of the party PP till saturday!!!!!
Title: Re: Coverage of Supreme Court hearing-DON'T POST UNLESS YOU ARE WATCHING THE HEA
Post by: caique mateus on June 10, 2009, 01:53:27 PM
He is talking about past decision's favourable to Bruna
Title: Re: Coverage of Supreme Court hearing-DON'T POST UNLESS YOU ARE WATCHING THE HEA
Post by: cindy85 on June 10, 2009, 01:53:35 PM
he is explainning that Bruna won David...
that the justice had already said that Sean could stay in Brasil
Title: Re: Coverage of Supreme Court hearing-DON'T POST UNLESS YOU ARE WATCHING THE HEA
Post by: cindy85 on June 10, 2009, 01:53:59 PM
he says that David is asking the same thing from 5 years ago
Title: Re: Coverage of Supreme Court hearing-DON'T POST UNLESS YOU ARE WATCHING THE HEA
Post by: caique mateus on June 10, 2009, 01:54:41 PM
He says JP had "posse compartilhada" together with maternal grandparents.
Title: Re: Coverage of Supreme Court hearing-DON'T POST UNLESS YOU ARE WATCHING THE HEA
Post by: cindy85 on June 10, 2009, 01:54:49 PM
he says that Sean is legally in Brasil.. that HC can not be used
Title: Re: Coverage of Supreme Court hearing-DON'T POST UNLESS YOU ARE WATCHING THE HEA
Post by: cindy85 on June 10, 2009, 01:55:48 PM
he said that the Federal Judge didnt understand the issue..
Title: Re: Coverage of Supreme Court hearing-DON'T POST UNLESS YOU ARE WATCHING THE HEA
Post by: Lola on June 10, 2009, 01:56:23 PM
The atorney of PP is still talking. Saying sean must stay because he is Brazilian
Title: Re: Coverage of Supreme Court hearing-DON'T POST UNLESS YOU ARE WATCHING THE HEA
Post by: cindy85 on June 10, 2009, 01:56:33 PM
he said that as a brasilian and american citizen, Sean can not go! or he wouldnt come back
Title: Re: Coverage of Supreme Court hearing-DON'T POST UNLESS YOU ARE WATCHING THE HEA
Post by: André Felipe on June 10, 2009, 01:56:55 PM
as I said before about Ellen Gracie, PP´s attorney is very aware she is an "enthusiast" of the Hague Convention.
 
In resume, he is saying the previous judgment (Bruna x David) ended the discussion, and David could not start another judicial discussion, filling a judicial action in a Court that doesn´t have attribution to decide about Family Law issues.
Title: Re: Coverage of Supreme Court hearing-DON'T POST UNLESS YOU ARE WATCHING THE HEA
Post by: naiarax on June 10, 2009, 01:57:05 PM
HC does not apply... Sean is in Brazil legally
Title: Re: Coverage of Supreme Court hearing-DON'T POST UNLESS YOU ARE WATCHING THE HEA
Post by: cindy85 on June 10, 2009, 01:57:20 PM
he said that AGU should not be heard
Title: Re: Coverage of Supreme Court hearing-DON'T POST UNLESS YOU ARE WATCHING THE HEA
Post by: caique mateus on June 10, 2009, 01:57:50 PM
He says AGU should not act in this case
Title: Re: Coverage of Supreme Court hearing-DON'T POST UNLESS YOU ARE WATCHING THE HEA
Post by: naiarax on June 10, 2009, 01:58:09 PM
David should not have used the HC after Bruna's death.... No involving the AGU....
Title: Re: Coverage of Supreme Court hearing-DON'T POST UNLESS YOU ARE WATCHING THE HEA
Post by: Lola on June 10, 2009, 01:58:14 PM
He is saying that the AGU shoudn't have defend and help David.
Title: Re: Coverage of Supreme Court hearing-DON'T POST UNLESS YOU ARE WATCHING THE HEA
Post by: cindy85 on June 10, 2009, 01:58:32 PM
now Tostes is going to talk!!
Title: Re: Coverage of Supreme Court hearing-DON'T POST UNLESS YOU ARE WATCHING THE HEA
Post by: Lola on June 10, 2009, 01:58:45 PM
attorney of jpls is talking now
Title: Re: Coverage of Supreme Court hearing-DON'T POST UNLESS YOU ARE WATCHING THE HEA
Post by: naiarax on June 10, 2009, 01:58:51 PM
JPLS lawyer
Title: Re: Coverage of Supreme Court hearing-DON'T POST UNLESS YOU ARE WATCHING THE HEA
Post by: naiarax on June 10, 2009, 01:59:36 PM
Talking about the UN child's right
Title: Re: Coverage of Supreme Court hearing-DON'T POST UNLESS YOU ARE WATCHING THE HEA
Post by: naiarax on June 10, 2009, 01:59:57 PM
United Nations
Title: Re: Coverage of Supreme Court hearing-DON'T POST UNLESS YOU ARE WATCHING THE HEA
Post by: cindy85 on June 10, 2009, 02:01:01 PM
he said that only USA in the whole world didnt sign this treaty
that this treaty is much mor eimportant than HC
Title: Re: Coverage of Supreme Court hearing-DON'T POST UNLESS YOU ARE WATCHING THE HEA
Post by: caique mateus on June 10, 2009, 02:01:06 PM
He says UN's child right is more important that HT
Title: Re: Coverage of Supreme Court hearing-DON'T POST UNLESS YOU ARE WATCHING THE HEA
Post by: naiarax on June 10, 2009, 02:01:08 PM
Defending it that it is broader and that lotsof country are signatario but the US.....
Title: Re: Coverage of Supreme Court hearing-DON'T POST UNLESS YOU ARE WATCHING THE HEA
Post by: André Felipe on June 10, 2009, 02:01:44 PM
he is saying a UN´s Convention is more comprehensive about child´s protection than the HC, and he sayed the USA is the only country that did not signed this UN´s Convention.
Title: Re: Coverage of Supreme Court hearing-DON'T POST UNLESS YOU ARE WATCHING THE HEA
Post by: Lola on June 10, 2009, 02:01:52 PM
talking about UN child's right: a child has right to choose where he wants to live.
Title: Re: Coverage of Supreme Court hearing-DON'T POST UNLESS YOU ARE WATCHING THE HEA
Post by: naiarax on June 10, 2009, 02:05:09 PM
Saying that the Judge Raphael decision was not human... decided at 530pm and use of military force if necessary...
Title: Re: Coverage of Supreme Court hearing-DON'T POST UNLESS YOU ARE WATCHING THE HEA
Post by: Lola on June 10, 2009, 02:05:16 PM
talking about pinto's sentence. saying sean's rights hasn't been respected with that sentence. saying it was crual to ask the brazilian family to bring sean to the consulate, knowing that sean doesn't want to go.
Title: Re: Coverage of Supreme Court hearing-DON'T POST UNLESS YOU ARE WATCHING THE HEA
Post by: naiarax on June 10, 2009, 02:05:49 PM
making it sound like a terrorism act... lots of drama... Saying Sean is Brazilian
Title: Re: Coverage of Supreme Court hearing-DON'T POST UNLESS YOU ARE WATCHING THE HEA
Post by: cindy85 on June 10, 2009, 02:05:55 PM
he is saying that the federal judge treated sean, a brasilian, as object..
taking him to usa against his will
Title: Re: Coverage of Supreme Court hearing-DON'T POST UNLESS YOU ARE WATCHING THE HEA
Post by: Lola on June 10, 2009, 02:05:57 PM
Pinto's sentence = crualty, not human
Title: Re: Coverage of Supreme Court hearing-DON'T POST UNLESS YOU ARE WATCHING THE HEA
Post by: Lola on June 10, 2009, 02:08:24 PM
saying sean wants to stay in brazil
Title: Re: Coverage of Supreme Court hearing-DON'T POST UNLESS YOU ARE WATCHING THE HEA
Post by: naiarax on June 10, 2009, 02:08:33 PM
Saying Sean clearly says he wants to stay n brazil... 7 times
Title: Re: Coverage of Supreme Court hearing-DON'T POST UNLESS YOU ARE WATCHING THE HEA
Post by: cindy85 on June 10, 2009, 02:09:02 PM
he is saying that sean said he wanted to stay
and the judge didnt take into consideration
Title: Re: Coverage of Supreme Court hearing-DON'T POST UNLESS YOU ARE WATCHING THE HEA
Post by: naiarax on June 10, 2009, 02:09:09 PM
Judge ignored it
Title: Re: Coverage of Supreme Court hearing-DON'T POST UNLESS YOU ARE WATCHING THE HEA
Post by: naiarax on June 10, 2009, 02:11:04 PM
Saying Sean said oce it doesnt matter... and they took it as the truth and his real wish
Title: Re: Coverage of Supreme Court hearing-DON'T POST UNLESS YOU ARE WATCHING THE HEA
Post by: cindy85 on June 10, 2009, 02:11:08 PM
that the psicologists interpreted sean as if he didnt care
but it was just a interpretation
Title: Re: Coverage of Supreme Court hearing-DON'T POST UNLESS YOU ARE WATCHING THE HEA
Post by: cindy85 on June 10, 2009, 02:11:45 PM
that the judge should have heard sean to give the chance to show where he wants to stay
Title: Re: Coverage of Supreme Court hearing-DON'T POST UNLESS YOU ARE WATCHING THE HEA
Post by: Lola on June 10, 2009, 02:11:51 PM
saying judge MUST listen Sean and do what sean wants to do
Title: Re: Coverage of Supreme Court hearing-DON'T POST UNLESS YOU ARE WATCHING THE HEA
Post by: naiarax on June 10, 2009, 02:12:14 PM
Judge did not want to hear Sean...even though they were arranging it... He should have heard him as a right
Title: Re: Coverage of Supreme Court hearing-DON'T POST UNLESS YOU ARE WATCHING THE HEA
Post by: naiarax on June 10, 2009, 02:13:01 PM
He is done
Title: Re: Coverage of Supreme Court hearing-DON'T POST UNLESS YOU ARE WATCHING THE HEA
Post by: cindy85 on June 10, 2009, 02:13:11 PM
he says how important this case is for our democracy
Title: Re: Coverage of Supreme Court hearing-DON'T POST UNLESS YOU ARE WATCHING THE HEA
Post by: Lola on June 10, 2009, 02:13:17 PM
tostes has finish
Title: Re: Coverage of Supreme Court hearing-DON'T POST UNLESS YOU ARE WATCHING THE HEA
Post by: Lola on June 10, 2009, 02:13:36 PM
now david's attorney
Title: Re: Coverage of Supreme Court hearing-DON'T POST UNLESS YOU ARE WATCHING THE HEA
Post by: Dan_Plainview on June 10, 2009, 02:14:40 PM
Go Mr. Z!!!!!!!!
Title: Re: Coverage of Supreme Court hearing-DON'T POST UNLESS YOU ARE WATCHING THE HEA
Post by: cindy85 on June 10, 2009, 02:14:56 PM
he is saying that ADPF shouldnt be accepted.. as it is not made for this kind of case
Title: Re: Coverage of Supreme Court hearing-DON'T POST UNLESS YOU ARE WATCHING THE HEA
Post by: liesl78 on June 10, 2009, 02:15:17 PM
They're posting photos of the audience here
http://www.stf.jus.br/portal/cms/listarImagem.asp
Title: Re: Coverage of Supreme Court hearing-DON'T POST UNLESS YOU ARE WATCHING THE HEA
Post by: André Felipe on June 10, 2009, 02:15:46 PM
Zamariola is saying ADPF is not the appropriate procedure because it can not be used in an especific case. It should be used for an issue envolvin a generality of situations.
Title: Re: Coverage of Supreme Court hearing-DON'T POST UNLESS YOU ARE WATCHING THE HEA
Post by: Lola on June 10, 2009, 02:20:37 PM
saying the psychologic test results said that sean sais he "doesn't care"
Title: Re: Coverage of Supreme Court hearing-DON'T POST UNLESS YOU ARE WATCHING THE HEA
Post by: André Felipe on June 10, 2009, 02:20:38 PM
He is askin the ADPF should not be accepted.
If the Ministers agree with it, the ADPF will be closed, and the fight goes on if there is a JPLS´appeal (with a preliminary decision) at the second level (TRF).
Title: Re: Coverage of Supreme Court hearing-DON'T POST UNLESS YOU ARE WATCHING THE HEA
Post by: Lola on June 10, 2009, 02:21:06 PM
talking about "parental alienation"
Title: Re: Coverage of Supreme Court hearing-DON'T POST UNLESS YOU ARE WATCHING THE HEA
Post by: naiarax on June 10, 2009, 02:21:07 PM
He is clarifying that the Sean said it doesnt matter.... He only cleared said he wants to stay after talking to the maternal doc
Title: Re: Coverage of Supreme Court hearing-DON'T POST UNLESS YOU ARE WATCHING THE HEA
Post by: Lola on June 10, 2009, 02:22:13 PM
saying sean has suffered of parental alienation
saying that JPLS said to sean that David abandonned him
Title: Re: Coverage of Supreme Court hearing-DON'T POST UNLESS YOU ARE WATCHING THE HEA
Post by: Lola on June 10, 2009, 02:23:03 PM
saying sean said he wanted to stay in Brazil because he was afraid to betrayed his mum and his step-father
Title: Re: Coverage of Supreme Court hearing
Post by: sonia on June 10, 2009, 02:23:13 PM
if you know someone in brasil , with skype and tv..that's the way i'm doin..my sister has skype. and tv
Title: Re: Coverage of Supreme Court hearing-DON'T POST UNLESS YOU ARE WATCHING THE HEA
Post by: Mom25 on June 10, 2009, 02:23:14 PM
RZ: SEAN NAO TEM CONDICOES PSICOLOGICAS E EMOCIONAIS PARA ESCOLHER O QUE DESEJA
Title: Re: Coverage of Supreme Court hearing-DON'T POST UNLESS YOU ARE WATCHING THE HEA
Post by: Grace on June 10, 2009, 02:27:29 PM
I can hear the radio now!. Zamariola says he wants to propose that everyone looks not at the 5 years spent in Brazil, but all the years he still has to live, and that he does not have his mother but has his father now, We should not prevent this child from being with his father for all the upcoming years. he cannot be an orphan of mother and also an orphan of father!
Title: Re: Coverage of Supreme Court hearing-DON'T POST UNLESS YOU ARE WATCHING THE HEA
Post by: Lola on June 10, 2009, 02:30:37 PM
attorney of AGU is talking now
Title: Re: Coverage of Supreme Court hearing-DON'T POST UNLESS YOU ARE WATCHING THE HEA
Post by: Mom25 on June 10, 2009, 02:30:59 PM
(I can hear it too... tried to post but the site went down... )
 
Cont:
41 cases that are in Brazil against one of the parents...
Title: Re: Coverage of Supreme Court hearing-DON'T POST UNLESS YOU ARE WATCHING THE HEA
Post by: Lola on June 10, 2009, 02:31:09 PM
saying david is fighting for sean since the beginning
Title: Re: Coverage of Supreme Court hearing-DON'T POST UNLESS YOU ARE WATCHING THE HEA
Post by: André Felipe on June 10, 2009, 02:33:02 PM
Zamariola was smart: the appropriate place for a child be listened about his wish is at a pychologists office, not in a court, in front of a judge. So, the child was listened, and this is in accordance to UN´s Convention. (Tostes said Sean wasn´t listened by the judge)
 
Ow gosh, I liked Zamariola, but I am AMAZEED with Toffoli!
Title: Re: Coverage of Supreme Court hearing-DON'T POST UNLESS YOU ARE WATCHING THE HEA
Post by: Mom25 on June 10, 2009, 02:34:36 PM
Talking about ARTICLE 1634 of BRAZILIAN CIVIL CODE
Title: Re: Coverage of Supreme Court hearing-DON'T POST UNLESS YOU ARE WATCHING THE HEA
Post by: Mom25 on June 10, 2009, 02:36:22 PM
"There is NO Judicial order that can suspend the parental authority that David Goldman has over his son"
Title: Re: Coverage of Supreme Court hearing-DON'T POST UNLESS YOU ARE WATCHING THE HEA
Post by: Wendy on June 10, 2009, 02:36:53 PM
whooohoo!!! Common Sense at LAST! GO TOFFOLI!!!
Title: Re: Coverage of Supreme Court hearing-DON'T POST UNLESS YOU ARE WATCHING THE HEA
Post by: Grace on June 10, 2009, 02:37:05 PM
There is no valid judicial decision known to remove David Goldmans right to be be with his son. His right was NEVER questioned. The only other person with RIGHTS to him is his mother, but she is not alive. Other relatives are subsitute family. Toffoli is brilliant! Both him and Z are brilliant! Zamariola and Toffoli: I love these Italian-Brazilians!
Title: Re: Coverage of Supreme Court hearing-DON'T POST UNLESS YOU ARE WATCHING THE HEA
Post by: Mom25 on June 10, 2009, 02:38:15 PM
(by the way we have 562 people viewing this thread RIGHT NOW)
 
talking about the authority of birth parents or ADOPTED parents - Sean is NOT adopted by anyone...
Title: Re: Coverage of Supreme Court hearing-DON'T POST UNLESS YOU ARE WATCHING THE HEA
Post by: André Felipe on June 10, 2009, 02:40:25 PM
Quote from: Wendy;31346
whooohoo!!! Common Sense at LAST! GO TOFFOLI!!!

with sure is going!!! that guy definetely deserves to become the next Supreme Court Minister!! The arguments he is saying are beautiful!!
 
Of course I aproved Zamariola, but he concentrated more on the procedural aspect of the ADPF, Toofli is concentrating fire in the "heart" of the issue. Peharps they have planned this strategy.
Title: Re: Coverage of Supreme Court hearing-DON'T POST UNLESS YOU ARE WATCHING THE HEA
Post by: Grace on June 10, 2009, 02:40:55 PM
Toffoli: We are not talking about extradition. We are talking about the place of residence, not nationality. His place of residence is the USA.
Title: Re: Coverage of Supreme Court hearing-DON'T POST UNLESS YOU ARE WATCHING THE HEA
Post by: Mom25 on June 10, 2009, 02:41:32 PM
"We are not talking about 'extradition' - we are talking about legal place of residence"
Title: Re: Coverage of Supreme Court hearing-DON'T POST UNLESS YOU ARE WATCHING THE HEA
Post by: RogerC on June 10, 2009, 02:41:46 PM
"This is not an extradition case"
Title: Re: Coverage of Supreme Court hearing-DON'T POST UNLESS YOU ARE WATCHING THE HEA
Post by: naiarax on June 10, 2009, 02:42:28 PM
Saying the Judge Raphael's decision sad immediate return and transition time is in the US.... talking about page 57 of the decision
Title: Re: Coverage of Supreme Court hearing-DON'T POST UNLESS YOU ARE WATCHING THE HEA
Post by: Grace on June 10, 2009, 02:42:38 PM
Toffoli: IMMEDIATE return of Sean according to the Hague convention!! The 48 hours is not a cruelty because there is a TRANSITION period.
Title: Re: Coverage of Supreme Court hearing-DON'T POST UNLESS YOU ARE WATCHING THE HEA
Post by: Mom25 on June 10, 2009, 02:42:48 PM
HC establishes the IMMEDIATE RETURN of the kidnapped child - to the USA
Title: Re: Coverage of Supreme Court hearing-DON'T POST UNLESS YOU ARE WATCHING THE HEA
Post by: naiarax on June 10, 2009, 02:44:04 PM
Not returing Sean is legalizing an illegal act....
Title: Re: Coverage of Supreme Court hearing-DON'T POST UNLESS YOU ARE WATCHING THE HEA
Post by: Grace on June 10, 2009, 02:44:22 PM
The case will be discussed in NJ. We are here to follow the Hague Convention.
Title: Re: Coverage of Supreme Court hearing-DON'T POST UNLESS YOU ARE WATCHING THE HEA
Post by: Mom25 on June 10, 2009, 02:44:37 PM
(right on Grace!! :))
 
He is reading the Judge's transition plan, as one that would be quite adjustable for Sean and that the Brazilian family would THEN be able to fight for him in the US... but first, Sean must return to the US
Title: Re: Coverage of Supreme Court hearing-DON'T POST UNLESS YOU ARE WATCHING THE HEA
Post by: anna42 on June 10, 2009, 02:45:11 PM
Thank you everyone for keeping us updated!
Title: Re: Coverage of Supreme Court hearing-DON'T POST UNLESS YOU ARE WATCHING THE HEA
Post by: naiarax on June 10, 2009, 02:45:18 PM
Sean's decision should not be the final one because of parental alienation
Title: Re: Coverage of Supreme Court hearing-DON'T POST UNLESS YOU ARE WATCHING THE HEA
Post by: Câmara on June 10, 2009, 02:45:51 PM
Toffoli is amazing!
Title: Re: Coverage of Supreme Court hearing-DON'T POST UNLESS YOU ARE WATCHING THE HEA
Post by: Grace on June 10, 2009, 02:46:10 PM
Sean does not have psychological conditions to say where he wants to live. Sean is not mature enough. He ends asking to not give a referendum to Marco Aurelio's motion.
Title: Re: Coverage of Supreme Court hearing-DON'T POST UNLESS YOU ARE WATCHING THE HEA
Post by: Mom25 on June 10, 2009, 02:47:09 PM
talking about the liminar now...
Title: Re: Coverage of Supreme Court hearing-DON'T POST UNLESS YOU ARE WATCHING THE HEA
Post by: Mom25 on June 10, 2009, 02:56:44 PM
I lost connection - they are talking about the order regarding Sean's return to the consulate... if all procedures were within the law...
Title: Re: Coverage of Supreme Court hearing-DON'T POST UNLESS YOU ARE WATCHING THE HEA
Post by: Teena on June 10, 2009, 03:02:23 PM
Sorry to post...
 
Grace, Mom can you tell us who is speaking? I hear a different voice.
Title: Re: Coverage of Supreme Court hearing-DON'T POST UNLESS YOU ARE WATCHING THE HEA
Post by: carina on June 10, 2009, 04:15:09 PM
David won, but there is another process in Rio now. The LES are getting exactly what they want: TIME
Title: Re: Coverage of Supreme Court hearing-DON'T POST UNLESS YOU ARE WATCHING THE HEA
Post by: jl2saint on June 10, 2009, 04:15:13 PM
Quote from: Teena;31369
Sorry to post...
 
Grace, Mom can you tell us who is speaking? I hear a different voice.


HLN just ran an update saying that the court WILL NOT BLOCK SEANS RETURN!!!!!And clarification?
Title: Re: Coverage of Supreme Court hearing-DON'T POST UNLESS YOU ARE WATCHING THE HEA
Post by: carina on June 10, 2009, 04:16:26 PM
http://g1.globo.com/Noticias/Rio/0,,MUL1190209-5606,00-STF+ARQUIVA+PROCESSO+SOBRE+SEAN+MAS+LIMINAR+QUE+O+MANTEM+NO+PAIS+AINDA+VALE.html
Title: Re: Coverage of Supreme Court hearing-DON'T POST UNLESS YOU ARE WATCHING THE HEA
Post by: André Felipe on June 10, 2009, 04:17:44 PM
The hearing ended and the veridict was: not knowing the ADPF and not confirm the preliminary decision made by Marco Aurelio.
 
The Supreme Court decided that ADPF should be only used as the last measure, and, in this case, JPLS/Tostes could use the "normal" ways, and, there is a preliminary decision from TRF that also ordered Sean´s stay.
 
So, the ADPF lost its object and its merits shall not be analysed.
 
The fight goes on, at the second level of jurisdiction (TRF-RJ)
Title: Re: Coverage of Supreme Court hearing-DON'T POST UNLESS YOU ARE WATCHING THE HEA
Post by: lisacordova on June 10, 2009, 04:18:04 PM
This is what was just ruled today

http://www.stf.jus.br/portal/cms/listarNoticiaUltima.asp (http://www.stf.jus.br/portal/cms/listarNoticiaUltima.asp)


And here are pictures of David in court moments ago



http://www.stf.jus.br/portal/cms/listarImagem.asp (http://www.stf.jus.br/portal/cms/listarImagem.asp)
Title: Re: Coverage of Supreme Court hearing-DON'T POST UNLESS YOU ARE WATCHING THE HEA
Post by: rlw.mom on June 10, 2009, 04:18:14 PM
Andre or Roger-- give us the low-down on what this means legally?  I can't see a federal judge ruling differently than the Supreme Court judges.  Why can't these appeals be thrown out tomorrow and Sean comes home Saturday?
Title: Re: Coverage of Supreme Court hearing-DON'T POST UNLESS YOU ARE WATCHING THE HEA
Post by: vivienne on June 10, 2009, 04:18:15 PM
Another article

http://noticias.terra.com.br/brasil/interna/0,,OI3817610-EI306,00-Supremo+arquiva+acao+contra+volta+de+Sean+aos+EUA.html
Title: Re: Coverage of Supreme Court hearing-DON'T POST UNLESS YOU ARE WATCHING THE HEA
Post by: André Felipe on June 10, 2009, 04:19:20 PM
as a result, Sean shall stay in Brasil, not because of Marco Aurelio´s preliminary decision, but because a preliminary decision from TRF that ordered Sean´s stay until they analyse JPLS´appeal.
Title: Re: Coverage of Supreme Court hearing-DON'T POST UNLESS YOU ARE WATCHING THE HEA
Post by: lisacordova on June 10, 2009, 04:20:22 PM
Quote from: carina;31370
David won, but there is another process in Rio now. The LES are getting exactly what they want: TIME

 
HEY LES! U CAN RUN BUT U CANT HIDE! UR TIME WILL RUN OUT AND SEAN WILL BE BACK HOME WITH HIS FATHER.
Title: Re: Coverage of Supreme Court hearing-DON'T POST UNLESS YOU ARE WATCHING THE HEA
Post by: rlw.mom on June 10, 2009, 04:20:52 PM
Andre-- when will that appeal hearing take place?
Title: Re: Coverage of Supreme Court hearing-DON'T POST UNLESS YOU ARE WATCHING THE HEA
Post by: dana on June 10, 2009, 04:21:48 PM
Andre - given how "tight" Judge Pinto's 80 ruling was - how likely do you think there will be an appeal that would not be denied?
Title: Re: Coverage of Supreme Court hearing-DON'T POST UNLESS YOU ARE WATCHING THE HEA
Post by: finn on June 10, 2009, 04:22:08 PM
Quote from: André Felipe;31377
as a result, Sean shall stay in Brasil, not because of Marco Aurelio´s preliminary decision, but because a preliminary decision from TRF that ordered Sean´s stay until they analyse JPLS´appeal.

Andre,  what's your guess on the length of time for the pending appeals?
          and how many will be allowed?
Title: Re: Coverage of Supreme Court hearing-DON'T POST UNLESS YOU ARE WATCHING THE HEA
Post by: André Felipe on June 10, 2009, 04:22:30 PM
Quote from: rlw.mom;31380
Andre-- when will that appeal hearing take place?

TRF may announce a date, but I hope it will be sooner than the usual.
 
I believe it will take less time than the time we had to wait for Judge Pinto´s decision.
Title: Re: Coverage of Supreme Court hearing-DON'T POST UNLESS YOU ARE WATCHING THE HEA
Post by: lisacordova on June 10, 2009, 04:23:22 PM
Will David and Sean have time together since He is in Brazil?
Title: Re: Coverage of Supreme Court hearing-DON'T POST UNLESS YOU ARE WATCHING THE HEA
Post by: paigefaust10 on June 10, 2009, 04:24:13 PM
Quote from: André Felipe;31383
TRF may announce a date, but I hope it will be sooner than the usual.
 
I believe it will take less time than the time we had to wait for Judge Pinto´s decision.

This is utterly ridiculous! I forgot, how many appeals do they (Dark Side) have out there now? I'm very confused....
Title: Re: Coverage of Supreme Court hearing-DON'T POST UNLESS YOU ARE WATCHING THE HEA
Post by: carina on June 10, 2009, 04:24:34 PM
If you go to this site You can see live pictures
http://www.stf.jus.br/portal/cms/listarImagem.asp

Poor David looks so worn out.
Now What???? How long does he have to wait? Roger/Andre.
Title: Re: Coverage of Supreme Court hearing-DON'T POST UNLESS YOU ARE WATCHING THE HEA
Post by: Amazee on June 10, 2009, 04:25:15 PM
sorry, but i just fell into a black hole of nothing, but i am back....
 
so david won but he can't have his son?  --sorry sounding like sue moss.
Title: Re: Coverage of Supreme Court hearing-DON'T POST UNLESS YOU ARE WATCHING THE HEA
Post by: Ceilli on June 10, 2009, 04:26:41 PM
What was the vote?
Title: Re: Coverage of Supreme Court hearing-DON'T POST UNLESS YOU ARE WATCHING THE HEA
Post by: Ingrid on June 10, 2009, 04:26:41 PM
I just read the oglobo articule, did I misunderstand but it states that Sean will see David everyday, during the day for the first 15 days, then on day 16th he will begin staying over David's place (in Brasil, I assume), then at the beginning of the following month, he will begin living with David but his stepfather will have visitation rights.
 
"Nos primeiros 15 dias, passaria o dia com o pai americano e a noite com a família brasileira. Do 16º dia ao fim do primeiro mês, Sean passaria a dormir com o pai e a receber visitas diárias de quatro horas da família materna. A partir daí, a guarda definitiva seria do pai, e a família materna deveria pleitear à Justiça americana um
regime de visitas."
Title: Re: Coverage of Supreme Court hearing-DON'T POST UNLESS YOU ARE WATCHING THE HEA
Post by: Wendy on June 10, 2009, 04:27:47 PM
I am hopeful that since the Supreme court heard this case so quickly that the second level federal court will also move quickly with this case.  Given Judge Pintos excellent and well-thought-out initiall ruling, it's my opinion that the second appellate judge will have no choice but to uphold Pinto's ruling.  
 
However, we haven't yet seen what JP et Slime's appeal actually IS yet.  OMG those people DISGUST ME!!
 
This entire hearing today made a mockery of the judicial system in Brazil.  The PP KNEW that it was going to get thrown out.  JPLeS KNEW that they had no argument with this..but they also KNEW that filing it meant that Sean would stay. PIGS the lot of them!!! ....sorry...apoligies to pigs everywhere.
Title: Re: Coverage of Supreme Court hearing-DON'T POST UNLESS YOU ARE WATCHING THE HEA
Post by: Ingrid on June 10, 2009, 04:27:55 PM
http://g1.globo.com/Noticias/Rio/0,,...INDA+VALE.html
 
The link Carina added earlier today
Title: Re: Coverage of Supreme Court hearing-DON'T POST UNLESS YOU ARE WATCHING THE HEA
Post by: Mom25 on June 10, 2009, 04:28:07 PM
I could not access the site... this may not be news now for you, but here's a quick update from the STF website:
 
Supremo arquiva ação ajuizada pelo PP no caso Goldman (http://www.stf.jus.br/portal/cms/verNoticiaDetalhe.asp?idConteudo=109422)
O Plenário do Supremo Tribunal Federal decidiu, por unanimidade, arquivar a Arguição de Descumprimento de Preceito Fundamental (ADPF) 172, ajuizada pelo Partido Progressista (PP)....
(...) A liminar concedida pelo relator (Marco Aurélio) foi cassada não foi referendada pelo Plenário, conforme próprio voto do relator.

The Supreme Court unanimously decided to file the accusation brought by the Progressive Party (PP ).... The injunction granted by Marco Aurélio was quashed by the House, even Marco Aurélio voted to end the liminar...
 
That's my understanding... a not-so-small victory again :) but the reports here are not over yet!

More updates soon...
Title: Re: Coverage of Supreme Court hearing-DON'T POST UNLESS YOU ARE WATCHING THE HEA
Post by: paigefaust10 on June 10, 2009, 04:28:53 PM
Quote from: Ingrid;31389
I just read the oglobo articule, did I misunderstand but it states that Sean will see David everyday, during the day for the first 15 days, then on day 16th he will begin staying over David's place (in Brasil, I assume), then at the beginning of the following month, he will begin living with David but his stepfather will have visitation rights.
 
"Nos primeiros 15 dias, passaria o dia com o pai americano e a noite com a família brasileira. Do 16º dia ao fim do primeiro mês, Sean passaria a dormir com o pai e a receber visitas diárias de quatro horas da família materna. A partir daí, a guarda definitiva seria do pai, e a família materna deveria pleitear à Justiça americana um
regime de visitas."

If I'm not mistaken, that's actually a portion of Judge Pinto's report. This is the "Transition" period he spoke about. If Sean had come back to the United States, then they would have those visitations you mentioned above. Unless they changed it for David while he's in Brazil?
Title: Re: Coverage of Supreme Court hearing-DON'T POST UNLESS YOU ARE WATCHING THE HEA
Post by: André Felipe on June 10, 2009, 04:28:53 PM
Quote from: carina;31370
David won, but there is another process in Rio now. The LES are getting exactly what they want: TIME

technically, we can say it´s a "victory" for David, as this result was requested by Zamariola. The ADPF was closed, and its merits wasn´t analysed by the STF.
 
There are two good points about this hearing:
 
1) Minister Ellen Gracie made a excelent defense for the Hague Convention, she said: a) Brasil is being viewed as a non compliant; b) Brasil honored to respect the HC; c) Justice is being too slow about HC´s cases; d) The Rio de Janeiro´s State Court made several mistakes, no custody issue should not be analysed by it; e) many wrong things have been said about the Hague Convention; f) many wrong things have been said about this case (David´s case)
 
Her statements, in my opinion, is a signal that, in the future, if David´s case arrives at STF again, she will vote favourable for David
 
2) some Ministers, between the lines, criticized PP/Tostes for using the ADPF, as he should use the regular appeal´s procedures
Title: Re: Coverage of Supreme Court hearing-DON'T POST UNLESS YOU ARE WATCHING THE HEA
Post by: alleycat on June 10, 2009, 04:29:12 PM
ok... I am so totally lost...... anyone else?
Title: Re: Coverage of Supreme Court hearing-DON'T POST UNLESS YOU ARE WATCHING THE HEA
Post by: momofthree on June 10, 2009, 04:29:14 PM
Doesn't David at least have custody now, or will it not go into effect before appeals have been looked at?
Title: Re: Coverage of Supreme Court hearing-DON'T POST UNLESS YOU ARE WATCHING THE HEA
Post by: carina on June 10, 2009, 04:29:19 PM
Quote from: Ingrid;31389
I just read the oglobo articule, did I misunderstand but it states that Sean will see David everyday, during the day for the first 15 days, then on day 16th he will begin staying over David's place (in Brasil, I assume), then at the beginning of the following month, he will begin living with David but his stepfather will have visitation rights.
 
"Nos primeiros 15 dias, passaria o dia com o pai americano e a noite com a família brasileira. Do 16º dia ao fim do primeiro mês, Sean passaria a dormir com o pai e a receber visitas diárias de quatro horas da família materna. A partir daí, a guarda definitiva seria do pai, e a família materna deveria pleitear à Justiça americana um
regime de visitas."


That was Judge Pinto's earlier decision, before all this Carnival
Title: Re: Coverage of Supreme Court hearing-DON'T POST UNLESS YOU ARE WATCHING THE HEA
Post by: noah3698 on June 10, 2009, 04:29:20 PM
Quote from: Ingrid;31389
I just read the oglobo articule, did I misunderstand but it states that Sean will see David everyday, during the day for the first 15 days, then on day 16th he will begin staying over David's place (in Brasil, I assume), then at the beginning of the following month, he will begin living with David but his stepfather will have visitation rights.
 
"Nos primeiros 15 dias, passaria o dia com o pai americano e a noite com a família brasileira. Do 16º dia ao fim do primeiro mês, Sean passaria a dormir com o pai e a receber visitas diárias de quatro horas da família materna. A partir daí, a guarda definitiva seria do pai, e a família materna deveria pleitear à Justiça americana um
regime de visitas."

The transition period is in New Jersey but because of another appeal by LES it is not happening YET.
Title: Re: Coverage of Supreme Court hearing-DON'T POST UNLESS YOU ARE WATCHING THE HEA
Post by: JonathanR on June 10, 2009, 04:29:30 PM
Quote from: Ingrid;31389
I just read the oglobo articule, did I misunderstand but it states that Sean will see David everyday, during the day for the first 15 days, then on day 16th he will begin staying over David's place (in Brasil, I assume), then at the beginning of the following month, he will begin living with David but his stepfather will have visitation rights.
 
"Nos primeiros 15 dias, passaria o dia com o pai americano e a noite com a família brasileira. Do 16º dia ao fim do primeiro mês, Sean passaria a dormir com o pai e a receber visitas diárias de quatro horas da família materna. A partir daí, a guarda definitiva seria do pai, e a família materna deveria pleitear à Justiça americana um
regime de visitas."

What the hell does this mean? It's as if David's going to be living in Brazil. Or is this the transition period? Somebody explain!!
Title: Re: Coverage of Supreme Court hearing-DON'T POST UNLESS YOU ARE WATCHING THE HEA
Post by: Wendy on June 10, 2009, 04:30:10 PM
Quote from: Ingrid;31389
I just read the oglobo articule, did I misunderstand but it states that Sean will see David everyday, during the day for the first 15 days, then on day 16th he will begin staying over David's place (in Brasil, I assume), then at the beginning of the following month, he will begin living with David but his stepfather will have visitation rights.
 
"Nos primeiros 15 dias, passaria o dia com o pai americano e a noite com a família brasileira. Do 16º dia ao fim do primeiro mês, Sean passaria a dormir com o pai e a receber visitas diárias de quatro horas da família materna. A partir daí, a guarda definitiva seria do pai, e a família materna deveria pleitear à Justiça americana um
regime de visitas."

Ingrid...If you are reading that then it is likely a re-cap of Judge Pinto's original order that has been stayed.
Title: Re: Coverage of Supreme Court hearing-DON'T POST UNLESS YOU ARE WATCHING THE HEA
Post by: alleycat on June 10, 2009, 04:31:08 PM
Quote from: JonathanR;31400
What the hell does this mean? It's as if David's going to be living in Brazil. Or is this the transition period? Somebody explain!!

i AM TOTALLY LOST IN THE TRANSLATIONS.....
Title: Re: Coverage of Supreme Court hearing-DON'T POST UNLESS YOU ARE WATCHING THE HEA
Post by: Irish17 on June 10, 2009, 04:31:13 PM
How can this be?? The arguments from the AGU and David's lawyers surely were better then toasty.  Am I understanding all of this? David still can not bring Sean home with him? How many appeals can the lies e snakes get? The AGU knows whats going, h$%! everyone in Brazil knows whats going on, yet Sean is still stuck with those other people and not his real father??   I guess its nice that they are going to let him visit with Sean for a while at least.
 
Roger, anyone who knows the Brazilian legal system, please let us know the next step. Thx
Title: Re: Coverage of Supreme Court hearing-DON'T POST UNLESS YOU ARE WATCHING THE HEA
Post by: Jackie in Upstate NY on June 10, 2009, 04:32:05 PM
Roger - what the heck - we ALWAYS appreciate your 2 cents - ppplllleeeaaassseee ?
Title: Re: Coverage of Supreme Court hearing-DON'T POST UNLESS YOU ARE WATCHING THE HEA
Post by: Amazee on June 10, 2009, 04:32:44 PM
Thank you to all the listeners/viewers today who were posting us updates in this thread.  Bless your hearts!
Title: Re: Coverage of Supreme Court hearing-DON'T POST UNLESS YOU ARE WATCHING THE HEA
Post by: vivienne on June 10, 2009, 04:33:43 PM
Quote from: Amazee;31405
Thank you to all the listeners/viewers today who were posting us updates in this thread.  Bless your hearts!

Yes, thank you very, very much!
Title: Re: Coverage of Supreme Court hearing-DON'T POST UNLESS YOU ARE WATCHING THE HEA
Post by: liesl78 on June 10, 2009, 04:33:52 PM
My understanding is that the ADPF has been defeated but there's an appeal in the Rio Federal Justice still starying the decision. If they throw it out, Sean can return, but they haven't scheduled a hearing yet.
Title: Re: Coverage of Supreme Court hearing-DON'T POST UNLESS YOU ARE WATCHING THE HEA
Post by: Colie on June 10, 2009, 04:34:15 PM
Thanks to everyone who posted the updates....but I don't understand what was the final decision at the hearing....Who is the ADPF?  Does David get to take Sean home, or is there yet another hearing?
Title: Re: Coverage of Supreme Court hearing-DON'T POST UNLESS YOU ARE WATCHING THE HEA
Post by: dimpledoll on June 10, 2009, 04:35:06 PM
The Brazilian court rejected the bid to stops Seans return.
Thats great news! He's still one step closer to coming home!
We knew there would more appeals but the court rejected the PP appeal.
Now our government has to step up to the plate asap .
We should not have to wait even another week.
They are going Down!
Title: Re: Coverage of Supreme Court hearing-DON'T POST UNLESS YOU ARE WATCHING THE HEA
Post by: Ceilli on June 10, 2009, 04:36:04 PM
Quote from: Mom25;31393

The Supreme Court unanimously decided to file the accusation brought by the Progressive Party (PP ).... The injunction granted by Marco Aurélio was quashed by the House, even Marco Aurélio voted to end the liminar...


IMHO, Marco was just a pawn used to delay Sean's return allowing them enough time to get a stay at the 2nd level court. Well, they succeeded on that front, but will lose in the end.
Title: Re: Coverage of Supreme Court hearing-DON'T POST UNLESS YOU ARE WATCHING THE HEA
Post by: amiamida on June 10, 2009, 04:36:44 PM
Quote from: Ingrid;31389

 
"Nos primeiros 15 dias, passaria o dia com o pai americano e a noite com a família brasileira. Do 16º dia ao fim do primeiro mês, Sean passaria a dormir com o pai e a receber visitas diárias de quatro horas da família materna. A partir daí, a guarda definitiva seria do pai, e a família materna deveria pleitear à Justiça americana um
regime de visitas."


First 15 days, David has day visitations, Sean spends nights with Brazilian family.  16th day til end of 1st month, Sean sleeps at David's and the Brazilian family gets 4hour-a-day visitation.  After that, David has full custody and the maternal family will have to ask the American justice system for vistation rights.
Title: Re: Coverage of Supreme Court hearing-DON'T POST UNLESS YOU ARE WATCHING THE HEA
Post by: Irish17 on June 10, 2009, 04:37:31 PM
Quote from: liesl78;31408
My understanding is that the ADPF has been defeated but there's an appeal in the Rio Federal Justice still starying the decision. If they throw it out, Sean can return, but they haven't scheduled a hearing yet.

Is the Rio Federal Justice the same Federal Court that Judge Pinto is at?? What is the difference?? Some one, please explain....yes this is a good solid step forward for David & Sean. Toasty and company got a few words of warning from the judges as well (from what I can understand) yet David still can not bring Sean home?? I don't understand all of this, can some one else explain to the rest of us?? Please.
 
 
By the way, a huge thank you to all of the people who posted during the court proceedings.  Thank you Thank you Thank you!!!!!!  :)
Title: Re: Coverage of Supreme Court hearing-DON'T POST UNLESS YOU ARE WATCHING THE HEA
Post by: André Felipe on June 10, 2009, 04:37:39 PM
Quote from: lisacordova;31384
Will David and Sean have time together since He is in Brazil?

because of that decision made on February, David can see Sean anytime he wants.
 
Quote from: dana;31381
Andre - given how "tight" Judge Pinto's 80 ruling was - how likely do you think there will be an appeal that would not be denied?

I believe and I hope JPLS will loose all his appeals, the problem is to know how long it will take...
 
Quote from: paigefaust10;31385
This is utterly ridiculous! I forgot, how many appeals do they (Dark Side) have out there now? I'm very confused....

after TRF´s decision, he can appeal to STJ, or both STJ and STF. Against STJ´s decision, he can appeal to STF.
 
But, as higher the party climbs, more difficult will be to make an effective appeal.
From what we know about them, they will try to take this case until the last level (wich can be STJ or STF)
Title: Re: Coverage of Supreme Court hearing-DON'T POST UNLESS YOU ARE WATCHING THE HEA
Post by: Grace on June 10, 2009, 04:37:40 PM
One victory, but the bad news about the lower court I knew before this started today. My question is: how long will this other delay last.
Title: Re: Coverage of Supreme Court hearing-DON'T POST UNLESS YOU ARE WATCHING THE HEA
Post by: rcgracia on June 10, 2009, 04:37:46 PM
Quote from: Amazee;31405
Thank you to all the listeners/viewers today who were posting us updates in this thread.  Bless your hearts!


Thank you  so.....much!!!!!!!!:clapping::cheer::clapping:
Title: Re: Coverage of Supreme Court hearing-DON'T POST UNLESS YOU ARE WATCHING THE HEA
Post by: Ingrid on June 10, 2009, 04:38:35 PM
Here is the article I read that Carina posted.
 
I was questioning if what was stated, in the article, was correct?
http://g1.globo.com/Noticias/Rio/0,,...INDA+VALE.html
Title: Re: Coverage of Supreme Court hearing-DON'T POST UNLESS YOU ARE WATCHING THE HEA
Post by: dimpledoll on June 10, 2009, 04:38:59 PM
Quote from: amiamida;31413
First 15 days, David has day visitations, Sean spends nights with Brazilian family. 16th day til end of 1st month, Sean sleeps at David's and the Brazilian family gets 4hour-a-day visitation. After that, David has full custody and the maternal family will have to ask the American justice system for vistation rights.
Is this the case?? I was getting my info from google translation.
Title: Re: Coverage of Supreme Court hearing-DON'T POST UNLESS YOU ARE WATCHING THE HEA
Post by: Sashia on June 10, 2009, 04:39:00 PM
Quote from: Irish17;31403
How can this be?? The arguments from the AGU and David's lawyers surely were better then toasty. Am I understanding all of this? David still can not bring Sean home with him? How many appeals can the lies e snakes get? The AGU knows whats going, h$%! everyone in Brazil knows whats going on, yet Sean is still stuck with those other people and not his real father?? I guess its nice that they are going to let him visit with Sean for a while at least.
 
Roger, anyone who knows the Brazilian legal system, please let us know the next step. Thx

Even after the Supreme Court recognizes that Sean is a victim of Parental Alienation, which is ongoing, they are going to leave Sean with THEM????
What the hell kind of child protection is THAT?!
 
Sean will have ulcers from their constant badgering and probably withdrawal of emotional (if there ever was any) support.
That's how this works doesn't it? Nonna cries, JP leaves for the watering hole at the mere mention of Davids name from Sean's lips. And Sean is left alone in his confusion and pain.
Classic scenario.
Title: Re: Coverage of Supreme Court hearing-DON'T POST UNLESS YOU ARE WATCHING THE HEA
Post by: ENR on June 10, 2009, 04:40:41 PM
Quote from: Ceilli;31412
IMHO, Marco was just a pawn used to delay Sean's return allowing them enough time to get a stay at the 2nd level court. Well, they succeeded on that front, but will lose in the end.


I think they thought the supreme court would take much longer to hear the case.  Hopefully these appeals will be denied in a few days time...

Did they say anything about visitation or transition in the meantime?  I am not fully understanding where things stand :conf:
Title: Re: Coverage of Supreme Court hearing-DON'T POST UNLESS YOU ARE WATCHING THE HEA
Post by: liesl78 on June 10, 2009, 04:41:01 PM
Quote from: Irish17;31414
Is the Rio Federal Justice the same Federal Court that Judge Pinto is at?? What is the difference?? Some one, please explain....yes this is a good solid step forward for David & Sean. Toasty and company got a few words of warning from the judges as well (from what I can understand) yet David still can not bring Sean home?? I don't understand all of this, can some one else explain to the rest of us?? Please.
 
 
By the way, a huge thank you to all of the people who posted during the court proceedings. Thank you Thank you Thank you!!!!!! :)

Yes, same court
Title: Re: Coverage of Supreme Court hearing-DON'T POST UNLESS YOU ARE WATCHING THE HEA
Post by: Grace on June 10, 2009, 04:41:34 PM
Andre Felipe, none of that makes sense to me. The case has already been at the highest level, how can it go back again?
 
And you say it can climb up to the STF again? That can take years!! It's like they want to force David to stay in Brazil when he does not speak the language and does not have a job there. That is total nonsense. Lack of common sense is what has been lacking in this case for a long time.
Title: Re: Coverage of Supreme Court hearing-DON'T POST UNLESS YOU ARE WATCHING THE HEA
Post by: André Felipe on June 10, 2009, 04:41:41 PM
my post got lost far behind....
 
technically, we can say it´s a "victory" for David, as this result was requested by Zamariola. The ADPF was closed, and its merits wasn´t analysed by the STF.

There are two good points about this hearing:

1) Minister Ellen Gracie made a excelent defense for the Hague Convention, she said: a) Brasil is being viewed as a non compliant; b) Brasil honored to respect the HC; c) Justice is being too slow about HC´s cases; d) The Rio de Janeiro´s State Court made several mistakes, no custody issue should not be analysed by it; e) many wrong things have been said about the Hague Convention; f) many wrong things have been said about this case (David´s case)

Her statements, in my opinion, is a signal that, in the future, if David´s case arrives at STF again, she will vote favourable for David

2) some Ministers, between the lines, criticized PP/Tostes for using the ADPF, as he should use the regular appeal´s procedures
Title: Re: Coverage of Supreme Court hearing-DON'T POST UNLESS YOU ARE WATCHING THE HEA
Post by: Dan_Plainview on June 10, 2009, 04:42:31 PM
My understanding is that Tostes has already appealed and has a stay at the 2nd instance in Federal Court in Rio. I think that means that LeS will be heard there in Rio and yet another decision will be made, this time with (3) Judges voting.

If they (LeS or David) appeal the 2nd instance decision, it will go back to Brasilia before Superior Court where, if accepted, (5) Judges will vote. I think that is the end ... unless the end comes sooner (denied appeals).
Title: Re: Coverage of Supreme Court hearing-DON'T POST UNLESS YOU ARE WATCHING THE HEA
Post by: M.Capestro on June 10, 2009, 04:42:34 PM
Thanks so much to all our translators!! Really appreciate your support and efforts!
Title: Re: Coverage of Supreme Court hearing-DON'T POST UNLESS YOU ARE WATCHING THE HEA
Post by: Ceilli on June 10, 2009, 04:42:39 PM
Quote from: ENR;31421
I think they thought the supreme court would take much longer to hear the case. Hopefully these appeals will be denied in a few days time...
 
Did they say anything about visitation or transition in the meantime? I am not fully understanding where things stand :conf:

From what I understand, we are back to the same place as last week. Judge Pinto ordered the return BUT there is now an appeal at the 2nd level which has stayed the return.
 
The transition period is from Judge Pinto's decision from last week.
Title: Re: Coverage of Supreme Court hearing-DON'T POST UNLESS YOU ARE WATCHING THE HEA
Post by: carina on June 10, 2009, 04:42:42 PM
I read somewhere that Tostes knew he was going to loose this, so they already had this appeal In Rio's court as a back up plan. Just to gain time and slow the reunion process between David and Sean
I'm going to look for the link.
How many more appeals this family can came up with???? Isn't enough already??????
Makes me wonder how much Marco Aurelio was paid, since he voted against his own appeal!!!!
FYI: Marco Aurelio Mello is a cousin to Fernado Collor de Mello a  Brazilian president that was impeached because of corruption (is this the right word for corrupcao?)

So my thinking about this guy is: It must run in the family:madgo:
Title: Re: Coverage of Supreme Court hearing-DON'T POST UNLESS YOU ARE WATCHING THE HEA
Post by: heatheram29 on June 10, 2009, 04:42:46 PM
Quote from: liesl78;31408
My understanding is that the ADPF has been defeated but there's an appeal in the Rio Federal Justice still starying the decision. If they throw it out, Sean can return, but they haven't scheduled a hearing yet.

I'm sorry but this technical victory means NOTHING after all. I thought that the STF had the POWER to send Sean home with David IMMEDIATELY. Are they not the SUPREME COURT? Is it losing something in translation? Are they the SUPREME COURT OF THE TOWN? Or are the the SUPREME COURT OF THE COUNTRY?
 
Every minute the Brazilian govt allows this to drag on with ridiculous appeals is an INSULT to the HC, the US, to David, and to every single country that honors their commitment to the HC.
 
LULA.. put a stop to this. If these people weren't your friends this wouldn't be happening. SHAME ON YOU.
Title: Re: Coverage of Supreme Court hearing-DON'T POST UNLESS YOU ARE WATCHING THE HEA
Post by: kathy on June 10, 2009, 04:43:58 PM
Okay if its the same Courts as  Judge Pintos at then can they say enough with the appeals and send sean home or do they have to go thru all the appeals????  I'm come on already what the hell gives?????
Title: Re: Coverage of Supreme Court hearing-DON'T POST UNLESS YOU ARE WATCHING THE HEA
Post by: Irish17 on June 10, 2009, 04:45:15 PM
Quote from: liesl78;31422
Yes, same court

Woudn't it be great if Judge Pinto got the case again! Ok, yes I know that he can not, yet it would certainly cause toasty and company some anxious moments. The other issue is that these judges all know Judge Pinto, they can easily talk to him if they want about his decision; that is if they honor the appeals from toasty and company.  
 
By the way, can some one please tell me if Grandma Riberio has any way to appeal as well as jpls?? She talks and acts like she does, yet would like to make sure.  
 
This is a good positive day for Sean & David. The AGU and E. Grace minister will be watching this case from now on with very keen interest.  I truly believe that we have made huge strides today and all of them are positive! Continue to believe!
Title: Re: Coverage of Supreme Court hearing-DON'T POST UNLESS YOU ARE WATCHING THE HEA
Post by: Ceilli on June 10, 2009, 04:45:20 PM
http://www.app.com/article/20090610/NEWS/90610052/Brazil+high+court+rejects+bid+to+block+return+of+child&referrer=FRONTPAGECAROUSEL
Title: Re: Coverage of Supreme Court hearing-DON'T POST UNLESS YOU ARE WATCHING THE HEA
Post by: dimpledoll on June 10, 2009, 04:45:25 PM
Quote from: André Felipe;31424
my post got lost far behind....
 
technically, we can say it´s a "victory" for David, as this result was requested by Zamariola. The ADPF was closed, and its merits wasn´t analysed by the STF.
 
There are two good points about this hearing:
 
1) Minister Ellen Gracie made a excelent defense for the Hague Convention, she said: a) Brasil is being viewed as a non compliant; b) Brasil honored to respect the HC; c) Justice is being too slow about HC´s cases; d) The Rio de Janeiro´s State Court made several mistakes, no custody issue should not be analysed by it; e) many wrong things have been said about the Hague Convention; f) many wrong things have been said about this case (David´s case)
 
Her statements, in my opinion, is a signal that, in the future, if David´s case arrives at STF again, she will vote favourable for David
 
2) some Ministers, between the lines, criticized PP/Tostes for using the ADPF, as he should use the regular appeal´s procedures
Yes Andre,
that was the jist I got from trying to translate what was happening.
This is very good news!
Am I wrong, or is this a huge step forward for Sean and David??
Title: Re: Coverage of Supreme Court hearing-DON'T POST UNLESS YOU ARE WATCHING THE HEA
Post by: anna42 on June 10, 2009, 04:45:25 PM
The Justice system in Brazil is becoming a complete farce!  They know that they are in violation so why not let Sean go home and then they can appeal all they want.  The governments really need to step in now!  Enough is enough!  Sean is David's son and the grandparents and stepparent have no right to him!
Title: Re: Coverage of Supreme Court hearing-DON'T POST UNLESS YOU ARE WATCHING THE HEA
Post by: André Felipe on June 10, 2009, 04:45:30 PM
Quote from: Grace;31423
Andre Felipe, none of that makes sense to me. The case has already been at the highest level, how can it go back again?
That´s exactly the reason why the ADPF was closed, and its merits wasn´t analysed by STF. The case should NOT have be at the STF (the highest level) at this moment. The case should be at the second level (and it is).
STF can only apreciate this case if the LeS fills an appeal against a decision made by TRF (second level) or STJ.
 
And you say it can climb up to the STF again? That can take years!! It's like they want to force David to stay in Brazil when he does not speak the language and does not have a job there. That is total nonsense. Lack of common sense is what has been lacking in this case for a long time.
Usually, it can take years, but I believe it won´t happen with this case, I hope to see a final decision in this year...
 
Title: Re: Coverage of Supreme Court hearing-DON'T POST UNLESS YOU ARE WATCHING THE HEA
Post by: Lexi on June 10, 2009, 04:45:46 PM
Thanks for the updates guys.
 
Andre:
You made me laugh with your enthusiastic reviews of Toffoli's performance. I had looked at his profile yesterday and decided he must be whipsmart to be AG at 42!
 
One thing though, you have to concede now that this was merely a diversionary and delaying tactic on the LeS part! They were buying time to increase the 48-hour deadline and allow them to file the lower court appeal.
Title: Re: Coverage of Supreme Court hearing-DON'T POST UNLESS YOU ARE WATCHING THE HEA
Post by: TraceyB on June 10, 2009, 04:45:52 PM
Thanks so much to all the translators!!!
Title: Re: Coverage of Supreme Court hearing-DON'T POST UNLESS YOU ARE WATCHING THE HEA
Post by: carina on June 10, 2009, 04:45:56 PM
Quote from: Dan_Plainview;31425
My understanding is that Tostes has already appealed and has a stay at the 2nd instance in Federal Court in Rio. I think that means that LeS will be heard there in Rio and yet another decision will be made, this time with (3) Judges voting.

If they (LeS or David) appeal the 2nd instance decision, it will go back to Brasilia before Superior Court where, if accepted, (5) Judges will vote. I think that is the end ... unless the end comes sooner (denied appeals).

Yea, so we can be here again months from now, it's just a snowball. They (the dark side) needs to be stopped
Title: Re: Coverage of Supreme Court hearing-DON'T POST UNLESS YOU ARE WATCHING THE HEA
Post by: roger on June 10, 2009, 04:46:21 PM
Quote from: liesl78;31422
Yes, same court

It is not the same court. Judge Pinto is a lower-court federal judge of the Rio de Janeiro Lower Federal Court.

The appeals are already being heard by the Appellete Federal Court of the 2nd. Circuit ("Tribunal Regional Federal da 2ª Região"), which covers the States of Rio de Janeiro and Espírito Santo.
Title: Re: Coverage of Supreme Court hearing-DON'T POST UNLESS YOU ARE WATCHING THE HEA
Post by: ENR on June 10, 2009, 04:46:52 PM
Quote from: Ceilli;31427
From what I understand, we are back to the same place as last week. Judge Pinto ordered the return BUT there is now an appeal at the 2nd level which has stayed the return.
 
The transition period is from Judge Pinto's decision from last week.


Does the transition period go into effect or waits until all appeals have to be heard and denied for that to take place?
Title: Re: Coverage of Supreme Court hearing-DON'T POST UNLESS YOU ARE WATCHING THE HEA
Post by: roger on June 10, 2009, 04:46:59 PM
Quote from: carina;31438
Yea, so we can be here again months from now, it's just a snowball. They (the dark side) needs to be stopped

Your understanding is correct.
Title: Re: Coverage of Supreme Court hearing-DON'T POST UNLESS YOU ARE WATCHING THE HEA
Post by: heatheram29 on June 10, 2009, 04:47:15 PM
Quote from: carina;31428
I read somewhere that Tostes knew he was going to loose this, so they already had this appeal In Rio's court as a back up plan. Just to gain time and slow the reunion process between David and Sean
I'm going to look for the link.
How many more appeals this family can came up with???? Isn't enough already??????
Makes me wonder how much Marco Aurelio was paid, since he voted against his own appeal!!!!
FYI: Marco Aurelio Mello is a cousin to Fernado Collor de Mello a Brazilian president that was impeached because of corruption (is this the right word for corrupcao?)
 
So my thinking about this guy is: It must run in the family:madgo:

Right before every ruling they are going to submit something new to stall it again. They are going to do this over and over again just to delay the ruling.
 
Can we really blame these cockroaches? Or do we blame the people who are allowing this to go on??
 
I'm DISGUSTED
Title: Re: Coverage of Supreme Court hearing-DON'T POST UNLESS YOU ARE WATCHING THE HEA
Post by: Duffchick on June 10, 2009, 04:48:50 PM
Quote from: heatheram29;31443
Right before every ruling they are going to submit something new to stall it again. They are going to do this over and over again just to delay the ruling.
 
Can we really blame these cockroaches? Or do we blame the people who are allowing this to go on??
 
I'm DISGUSTED

I agree how long can this go on!!! Seriously!!! Enough is enough!!!
Title: Re: Coverage of Supreme Court hearing-DON'T POST UNLESS YOU ARE WATCHING THE HEA
Post by: FC_Florida on June 10, 2009, 04:49:27 PM
Ok, I'm hyperventilating here. I lost most of the hearing, then BSH forum crashed....
 
I read in the O Globo comments that the case will go back to the Rio's courts. Is that good or bad?
 
Help me out here, please....
Title: Re: Coverage of Supreme Court hearing-DON'T POST UNLESS YOU ARE WATCHING THE HEA
Post by: :: ultranol :: on June 10, 2009, 04:49:42 PM
People, you should know that the Supreme Court today didn't added or touched anything regarding JPLeS or David's case, whether Sean is suffering from parental alienation, whether she should be heard by the judge or whatever. The closest thing that we've got was the fact of some of the ministers (most notably Ellen Gracie) saying that Brazil should respect Hague. But the only thing that was there for them to judge was the validity of the Progressive Party appeal, and they said that this appeal should not be made, there is another instance of Justice that is more able to deal with that.

Andre, correct me if I'm wrong.
Title: Re: Coverage of Supreme Court hearing-DON'T POST UNLESS YOU ARE WATCHING THE HEA
Post by: roger on June 10, 2009, 04:49:53 PM
Quote from: Lexi;31436
Thanks for the updates guys.
 
Andre:
You made me laugh with your enthusiastic reviews of Toffoli's performance. I had looked at his profile yesterday and decided he must be whipsmart to be AG at 42!
 
One thing though, you have to concede now that this was merely a diversionary and delaying tactic on the LeS part! They were buying time to increase the 48-hour deadline and allow them to file the lower court appeal.

Of course it was delaying tactic. All of us were pointing this out in the beginning, and Justice Marco Aurelio himself confirmed this on the record in a TV interview for Globo News, Globo TV's all-news channel.
Title: Re: Coverage of Supreme Court hearing-DON'T POST UNLESS YOU ARE WATCHING THE HEA
Post by: anna42 on June 10, 2009, 04:50:06 PM
Quote from: heatheram29;31443
Right before every ruling they are going to submit something new to stall it again. They are going to do this over and over again just to delay the ruling.
 
Can we really blame these cockroaches? Or do we blame the people who are allowing this to go on??
 
I'm DISGUSTED
I blame the governments...they need to step up.  This is wrong...completely wrong!  Chris Smith is right...they haven't complied...we need them to understand that there are repercussions for their actions!  Lula needs to step up ( I don't care if he is related)...!
Title: Re: Coverage of Supreme Court hearing-DON'T POST UNLESS YOU ARE WATCHING THE HEA
Post by: rlw.mom on June 10, 2009, 04:50:30 PM
Quote from: heatheram29;31443
Right before every ruling they are going to submit something new to stall it again. They are going to do this over and over again just to delay the ruling.
 
Can we really blame these cockroaches? Or do we blame the people who are allowing this to go on??
 
I'm DISGUSTED

I agree!!! :mad2:  I think it's time to flood the White House comment lines DAILY!!
Title: Re: Coverage of Supreme Court hearing-DON'T POST UNLESS YOU ARE WATCHING THE HEA
Post by: kathy on June 10, 2009, 04:50:47 PM
Okay I think Rep. Chris Smith needs to follow thru with the H.R .2702 i think thats the res. this needs to be over like tom.....
Title: Re: Coverage of Supreme Court hearing-DON'T POST UNLESS YOU ARE WATCHING THE HEA
Post by: MaraVitta on June 10, 2009, 04:51:04 PM
Quote from: André Felipe;31383
TRF may announce a date, but I hope it will be sooner than the usual.
 
I believe it will take less time than the time we had to wait for Judge Pinto´s decision.

Do you really think that? I'm not so sure, we have some lawsuits in TRF-RJ waiting for a decision for ages here...
 
That was what I feared, they are buying time... After TRF's decision, we'll wait also for STF, AGAIN...
Title: Re: Coverage of Supreme Court hearing-DON'T POST UNLESS YOU ARE WATCHING THE HEA
Post by: roger on June 10, 2009, 04:51:28 PM
Quote from: ENR;31421
I think they thought the supreme court would take much longer to hear the case.  Hopefully these appeals will be denied in a few days time...

Did they say anything about visitation or transition in the meantime?  I am not fully understanding where things stand :conf:

Visitation has been allowed anytime, since the February decision by the Superior Court of Justice.

No transition at this point, though.
Title: Re: Coverage of Supreme Court hearing-DON'T POST UNLESS YOU ARE WATCHING THE HEA
Post by: anna42 on June 10, 2009, 04:53:03 PM
Quote from: roger;31452
Visitation has been allowed anytime, since the February decision by the Superior Court of Justice.
 
No transition at this point, though.

But they don't allow him to have quiet private time or overnight visits...he is being treated like a prisoner/ stranger...they need to let him go away with his DAD!
Title: Re: Coverage of Supreme Court hearing-DON'T POST UNLESS YOU ARE WATCHING THE HEA
Post by: dimpledoll on June 10, 2009, 04:53:08 PM
Quote from: carina;31438
Yea, so we can be here again months from now, it's just a snowball. They (the dark side) needs to be stopped
NO, JPLS is just dragging on the ineveitable.
The rulings are favoring David every time.
If our gov't steps up to the plate, and puts a stop to their ruthless appeals, this should end quickly!
They are grasping at straws. It's time for sanctions immediately!
Title: Re: Coverage of Supreme Court hearing-DON'T POST UNLESS YOU ARE WATCHING THE HEA
Post by: Nicole's Dad on June 10, 2009, 04:53:11 PM
People. Please take your hands of of this. It's in God's hands. He is watching all of this. After reading all of the posts today and the info from Andre, this is very good news for David and Sean's plight to bring him home.
 
Everyone has to remember that this hearing today was NOT about Sean coming home. It was about whether the Hague treaty is constitutional to Brazilian law at the Supreme Court level.
 
If they've ruled that it needs to go back to the second level, then that is a victory for all of us including the other Chasing Parents. This is exactly what needed to happen. It may not happen on our time or when we want it to but the appeals WILL run their course and they WILL run out. It's not a matter of if but only a matter of when Sean will be returned to David.
 
We all have to learn to be patient and wait. I know Ricardo Zamariola very well as he also represented me in my case. He is very intelligent and knows what he is doing.
 
TODAY WAS A VICTORY IN THE RIGHT DIRECTION. CELEBRATE PEOPLE!!!!!!!!!!
Title: Re: Coverage of Supreme Court hearing-DON'T POST UNLESS YOU ARE WATCHING THE HEA
Post by: momofthree on June 10, 2009, 04:53:19 PM
Can the dark side appeal to a higher instance if their appeal to the 2nd level is thrown out or would that be the end?
Title: Re: Coverage of Supreme Court hearing-DON'T POST UNLESS YOU ARE WATCHING THE HEA
Post by: Lexi on June 10, 2009, 04:53:36 PM
Quote from: roger;31447
Of course it was delaying tactic. All of us were pointing this out in the beginning, and Justice Marco Aurelio himself confirmed this on the record in a TV interview for Globo News, Globo TV's all-news channel.

Yes, it was a red herring. There's no way Tostes believed it belonged there in the first place at least not under that application.
 
David will prevail - he's come this far.
Title: Re: Coverage of Supreme Court hearing-DON'T POST UNLESS YOU ARE WATCHING THE HEA
Post by: André Felipe on June 10, 2009, 04:53:51 PM
Quote from: :: ultranol ::;31446
People, you should know that the Supreme Court today didn't added or touched anything regarding JPLeS or David's case, whether Sean is suffering from parental alienation, whether she should be heard by the judge or whatever. The closest thing that we've got was the fact of some of the ministers (most notably Ellen Gracie) saying that Brazil should respect Hague. But the only thing that was there for them to judge was the validity of the Progressive Party appeal, and they said that this appeal should not be made, there is another instance of Justice that is more able to deal with that.
 
Andre, correct me if I'm wrong.

completely correct! Ellen Gracie statements was the best news of the day! We can all have sure she wants Sean´s return, but, by Law, she could not make a vote ordering Sean´s return, sad...
 
Quote from: FC_Florida;31445
Ok, I'm hyperventilating here. I lost most of the hearing, then BSH forum crashed....
 
I read in the O Globo comments that the case will go back to the Rio's courts. Is that good or bad?
 
Help me out here, please....

that´s is the normal "way"
Judge Pinto -  TRF - STJ - STF.
 
Tostes did Judge - STF, and now STF said it´s wrong.
Title: Re: Coverage of Supreme Court hearing-DON'T POST UNLESS YOU ARE WATCHING THE HEA
Post by: carina on June 10, 2009, 04:55:28 PM
Quote from: roger;31447
Of course it was delaying tactic. All of us were pointing this out in the beginning, and Justice Marco Aurelio himself confirmed this on the record in a TV interview for Globo News, Globo TV's all-news channel.

  So Roger how much more they can delay. I mean The LES have lost over and over. Is the legal system that slow??? Or is because we are talking about a powerful family. I'm Brazilian, I know how Brazil works... But this? it seems to much even for me.
Title: Re: Coverage of Supreme Court hearing-DON'T POST UNLESS YOU ARE WATCHING THE HEA
Post by: Grace on June 10, 2009, 04:56:06 PM
Quote from: heatheram29;31443
Right before every ruling they are going to submit something new to stall it again. They are going to do this over and over again just to delay the ruling.
 
Can we really blame these cockroaches? Or do we blame the people who are allowing this to go on??
 
I'm DISGUSTED

I blame the people who are allowing this to take any longer!! Marco Aurelio for one! Because the Lies and Slime and the RibERRORS and Toasted we already know will try every dirty trick they can. But the serious professionals that are allowing this to continue, and the total passivity of President Lula is apalling!
 
The more time goes by, the more angst this boy is feeling. He needs to have a decision about his life, he cannot feel he doesn't know where he is going and who he is going to be with. This is insane for Sean, for David and even for us supporters!
Title: Re: Coverage of Supreme Court hearing-DON'T POST UNLESS YOU ARE WATCHING THE HEA
Post by: lovellboys on June 10, 2009, 04:57:04 PM
Quote from: :: ultranol ::;31446
People, you should know that the Supreme Court today didn't added or touched anything regarding JPLeS or David's case, whether Sean is suffering from parental alienation, whether she should be heard by the judge or whatever. The closest thing that we've got was the fact of some of the ministers (most notably Ellen Gracie) saying that Brazil should respect Hague. But the only thing that was there for them to judge was the validity of the Progressive Party appeal, and they said that this appeal should not be made, there is another instance of Justice that is more able to deal with that.
 
Andre, correct me if I'm wrong.

 
Can and/or will the comments made by Ellen Gracie be used to help have the appeals denied??
Title: Re: Coverage of Supreme Court hearing-DON'T POST UNLESS YOU ARE WATCHING THE HEA
Post by: roger on June 10, 2009, 04:57:18 PM
Quote from: Grace;31423
Andre Felipe, none of that makes sense to me. The case has already been at the highest level, how can it go back again?
 
And you say it can climb up to the STF again? That can take years!! It's like they want to force David to stay in Brazil when he does not speak the language and does not have a job there. That is total nonsense. Lack of common sense is what has been lacking in this case for a long time.

The Supreme Court decided on, let's call, an "ancillary proceeding", without getting to the merits of Judge Pinto's lower-level sentencing.

The review of the merits of Judge Pinto's decision must be carried out by the immediate higher court, that is, the Federal Appellate Court of the 2nd. Circuit, with jurisdiction over the federal courts of the State of Rio de Janeiro and Espirito Santo.

And, according to early reports, the LeS had already filed for a stay of execution of Judge Pinto's ruling at the Appellate Court immediately after Judge Pinto's decision, and were granted this stay of execution. No merits were discussed, just the need for Sean to remain in Brazil while the Appellate Court review the merits.

Today was no small victory for David, but the bottom line is that, at the end of the day, the review of the merits of Judge Pinto's decision will still drag on for a while. For how long? No one can say at this point.
Title: Re: Coverage of Supreme Court hearing-DON'T POST UNLESS YOU ARE WATCHING THE HEA
Post by: Dan_Plainview on June 10, 2009, 04:57:49 PM
Quote from: ENR;31440
Does the transition period go into effect or waits until all appeals have to be heard and denied for that to take place?

All effects from Judge Pinto's decision are stayed. LeS still has temporary custody of David's boy. David can visit Sean anytime he wants with prior c/d with his step-father.
Title: Re: Coverage of Supreme Court hearing-DON'T POST UNLESS YOU ARE WATCHING THE HEA
Post by: FC_Florida on June 10, 2009, 04:58:09 PM
Quote from: André Felipe;31459
completely correct! Ellen Gracie statements was the best news of the day! We can all have sure she wants Sean´s return, but, by Law, she could not make a vote ordering Sean´s return, sad...
 
 
 
that´s is the normal "way"
Judge Pinto - TRF - STJ - STF.
 
Tostes did Judge - STF, and now STF said it´s wrong.

Thanks Andre. I think you've already mentioned that earlier, about Tostes altering the order...
 
Vc j'a tinha "cantado a bola" ...Thanks! Let's hope it will be a faster process.
Title: Re: Coverage of Supreme Court hearing-DON'T POST UNLESS YOU ARE WATCHING THE HEA
Post by: André Felipe on June 10, 2009, 04:58:24 PM
Quote from: Lexi;31458
Yes, it was a red herring. There's no way Tostes believed it belonged there in the first place at least not under that application.
 
David will prevail - he's come this far.

It was a delay tatic indeed. JPLS/Tostes believed they could not achieve a preliminary decision ordering Sean´s stay from the TRF on time, and they were correct! The preliminary decision from TRF came at wednesday night, and Sean would be at US that time. Lucky for them they get a preliminary decision from Marco Aurelio.
Title: Re: Coverage of Supreme Court hearing-DON'T POST UNLESS YOU ARE WATCHING THE HEA
Post by: vivienne on June 10, 2009, 04:59:12 PM
English article about STF ruling:

http://kdka.com/national/david.goldman.ruling.2.1039123.html

Quote
Brazilian court has rejected a bid to stop Sean Goldman's from being reunited with his father in Tinton Falls, N.J., CBS station WCBS-TV reported. The move puts David Goldman one step closer to bringing his son home.
Title: Re: Coverage of Supreme Court hearing-DON'T POST UNLESS YOU ARE WATCHING THE HEA
Post by: Grace on June 10, 2009, 04:59:17 PM
Quote from: anna42;31454
But they don't allow him to have quiet private time or overnight visits...he is being treated like a prisoner/ stranger...they need to let him go away with his DAD!

What kind of visitation is that? I know many parents who have visitation and can take their kids wherever they want, without a shadow following them around.  They treat David as if he were a mass murderer who cannot be alone with his own son!
Title: Re: Coverage of Supreme Court hearing-DON'T POST UNLESS YOU ARE WATCHING THE HEA
Post by: Lexi on June 10, 2009, 04:59:37 PM
Roger:
Are you saying that Marco Aurelio actually admitted on TV that he issued the injunction to help buy them time?
Title: Re: Coverage of Supreme Court hearing-DON'T POST UNLESS YOU ARE WATCHING THE HEA
Post by: roger on June 10, 2009, 05:00:46 PM
Quote from: momofthree;31457
Can the dark side appeal to a higher instance if their appeal to the 2nd level is thrown out or would that be the end?

They can appeal to the 3rd level, the Superior Court of Justice. And simultaneously to a parallel 3rd. leve, but this time on constitutional grounds: the very same Supreme Court, which today did not review the merits of Judge Pinto's decision.
Title: Re: Coverage of Supreme Court hearing-DON'T POST UNLESS YOU ARE WATCHING THE HEA
Post by: André Felipe on June 10, 2009, 05:00:54 PM
Quote from: lovellboys;31464
Can and/or will the comments made by Ellen Gracie be used to help have the appeals denied??

Absolutely, and I believe it will be used by Zamariola in the nexts appeal´s judgements.
Title: Re: Coverage of Supreme Court hearing-DON'T POST UNLESS YOU ARE WATCHING THE HEA
Post by: heatheram29 on June 10, 2009, 05:01:04 PM
Quote from: anna42;31454
But they don't allow him to have quiet private time or overnight visits...he is being treated like a prisoner/ stranger...they need to let him go away with his DAD!

 
But who is it that's forcing the visitations to occur in the courtyard of their condo? Is that part of the court document giving David visitation? It was my understanding that the 'family' are just insisting that he only see him in the courtyard.
 
David, stay in Brazil for now. Insist on visitations with Sean at a neutral location, and visit with him every day. If they want someone to be there then fine but tell them back the **** off.
Title: Re: Coverage of Supreme Court hearing-DON'T POST UNLESS YOU ARE WATCHING THE HEA
Post by: dimpledoll on June 10, 2009, 05:01:05 PM
Quote from: Grace;31463
I blame the people who are allowing this to take any longer!! Marco Aurelio for one! Because the Lies and Slime and the RibERRORS and Toasted we already know will try every dirty trick they can. But the serious professionals that are allowing this to continue, and the total passivity of President Lula is apalling!
 
The more time goes by, the more angst this boy is feeling. He needs to have a decision about his life, he cannot feel he doesn't know where he is going and who he is going to be with. This is insane for Sean, for David and even for us supporters!
:yeahthat::yeahthat::yeahthat:
YES, So we have to come down harder than ever on United States gov't to step up and make this a primary focus!
Title: Re: Coverage of Supreme Court hearing-DON'T POST UNLESS YOU ARE WATCHING THE HEA
Post by: FC_Florida on June 10, 2009, 05:01:13 PM
Quote from: Grace;31463
I blame the people who are allowing this to take any longer!! Marco Aurelio for one! Because the Lies and Slime and the RibERRORS and Toasted we already know will try every dirty trick they can. But the serious professionals that are allowing this to continue, and the total passivity of President Lula is apalling!
 
The more time goes by, the more angst this boy is feeling. He needs to have a decision about his life, he cannot feel he doesn't know where he is going and who he is going to be with. This is insane for Sean, for David and even for us supporters!

Grace, with the regards to Lula's passivity, I think it's going to bite on his a*** big time. I see a permanent seat in the UN Security Council flying away...
Title: Re: Coverage of Supreme Court hearing-DON'T POST UNLESS YOU ARE WATCHING THE HEA
Post by: caique mateus on June 10, 2009, 05:02:55 PM
I know it was a delaying tactic from the dark side.

But it was sooooooooooooo good to see all those ministers practically calling these people analphabets.

Plus, it’s clear that, if JPL&S appeals go to STF, he’ll loose.

So, I think it was an important victory.
Title: Re: Coverage of Supreme Court hearing-DON'T POST UNLESS YOU ARE WATCHING THE HEA
Post by: Lexi on June 10, 2009, 05:03:42 PM
Quote from: André Felipe;31468
It was a delay tatic indeed. JPLS/Tostes believed they could not achieve a preliminary decision ordering Sean´s stay from the TRF on time, and they were correct! The preliminary decision from TRF came at wednesday night, and Sean would be at US that time. Lucky for them they get a preliminary decision from Marco Aurelio.

It's one thing for them to deliberately file something they know has no chance of technically succeeding, but quite another for a judge to facilitate that. That's the part I find unbelievable especially when it's at the Supreme Court level.
Title: Re: Coverage of Supreme Court hearing-DON'T POST UNLESS YOU ARE WATCHING THE HEA
Post by: roger on June 10, 2009, 05:04:02 PM
Quote from: Lexi;31471
Roger:
Are you saying that Marco Aurelio actually admitted on TV that he issued the injunction to help buy them time?

I am saying that Marco Aurelio actually admitted on TV that he issued the injunction because he thought Sean could not leave the country for good before the Judge Pinto's decision received scrutiny from a higher court, and if this was something he was in a position to do, he was confortable with granting the injunction.

I take that as "helping them to buy time", as you noted.
Title: Re: Coverage of Supreme Court hearing-DON'T POST UNLESS YOU ARE WATCHING THE HEA
Post by: anna42 on June 10, 2009, 05:04:31 PM
Quote from: heatheram29;31475
But who is it that's forcing the visitations to occur in the courtyard of their condo? Is that part of the court document giving David visitation? It was my understanding that the 'family' are just insisting that he only see him in the courtyard.
 
David, stay in Brazil for now. Insist on visitations with Sean at a neutral location, and visit with him every day. If they want someone to be there then fine but tell them back the **** off.

I agree...this completely disgusts me!
Title: Re: Coverage of Supreme Court hearing-DON'T POST UNLESS YOU ARE WATCHING THE HEA
Post by: carina on June 10, 2009, 05:05:59 PM
Quote from: roger;31473
They can appeal to the 3rd level, the Superior Court of Justice. And simultaneously to a parallel 3rd. leve, but this time on constitutional grounds: the very same Supreme Court, which today did not review the merits of Judge Pinto's decision.

I'm no lawyer but Knowing this family i believe they'll continuing on appealing until they can't anymore. Hopefully  that will be soon.
Title: Re: Coverage of Supreme Court hearing-DON'T POST UNLESS YOU ARE WATCHING THE HEA
Post by: MaraVitta on June 10, 2009, 05:07:05 PM
Quote from: lovellboys;31464
Can and/or will the comments made by Ellen Gracie be used to help have the appeals denied??

Well, it shows her position about the case, and once STF shall judge it in last level...
Title: Re: Coverage of Supreme Court hearing-DON'T POST UNLESS YOU ARE WATCHING THE HEA
Post by: carina on June 10, 2009, 05:07:25 PM
Quote from: Lexi;31480
It's one thing for them to deliberately file something they know has no chance of technically succeeding, but quite another for a judge to facilitate that. That's the part I find unbelievable especially when it's at the Supreme Court level.
:yeahthat::yeahthat::yeahthat::yeahthat:
Title: Re: Coverage of Supreme Court hearing-DON'T POST UNLESS YOU ARE WATCHING THE HEA
Post by: rcgracia on June 10, 2009, 05:07:37 PM
Quote from: Nicole's Dad;31456
People. Please take your hands of of this. It's in God's hands. He is watching all of this. After reading all of the posts today and the info from Andre, this is very good news for David and Sean's plight to bring him home.
 
Everyone has to remember that this hearing today was NOT about Sean coming home. It was about whether the Hague treaty is constitutional to Brazilian law at the Supreme Court level.
 
If they've ruled that it needs to go back to the second level, then that is a victory for all of us including the other Chasing Parents. This is exactly what needed to happen. It may not happen on our time or when we want it to but the appeals WILL run their course and they WILL run out. It's not a matter of if but only a matter of when Sean will be returned to David.
 
We all have to learn to be patient and wait. I know Ricardo Zamariola very well as he also represented me in my case. He is very intelligent and knows what he is doing.
 
TODAY WAS A VICTORY IN THE RIGHT DIRECTION. CELEBRATE PEOPLE!!!!!!!!!!

Well said, Nicole's Dad!!!:clapping::yeahthat:
Title: Re: Coverage of Supreme Court hearing-DON'T POST UNLESS YOU ARE WATCHING THE HEA
Post by: ekc on June 10, 2009, 05:09:07 PM
I know that David lives in NJ but I know as a parent I would remain there as long as I could see my son anytime.  Any thoughts or anyone out there who can one, help get him cheaper flights down there (I know they are not cheap) and two, since the flight is like a 13 hour flight is there anyone who can either put him up for longer periods of time or get him a place to stay very inexpensively?  There have to be some airline workers, and or people out there with these types of pulls.  Then maybe he can have overnight visits and begin really building the relationship before he brings Sean home.  anyone out there who can get this info to him if we can help in this way?
Title: Re: Coverage of Supreme Court hearing-DON'T POST UNLESS YOU ARE WATCHING THE HEA
Post by: Lexi on June 10, 2009, 05:09:48 PM
Quote from: roger;31481
I am saying that Marco Aurelio actually admitted on TV that he issued the injunction because he thought Sean could not leave the country for good before the Judge Pinto's decision received scrutiny from a higher court, and if this was something he was in a position to do, he was confortable with granting the injunction.
 
I take that as "helping them to buy time", as you noted.

That floors me. As I said before, I'm starting to understand why the LeS are so pompous - that they could basically waste the Supreme Court's time knowing they had no business being there.
Title: Re: Coverage of Supreme Court hearing-DON'T POST UNLESS YOU ARE WATCHING THE HEA
Post by: Duffchick on June 10, 2009, 05:10:10 PM
Quote from: rcgracia;31491
Well said, Nicole's Dad!!!:clapping::yeahthat:

 
 This past week has been a victory for all the LBP with all the media attention. This is so wonderful!!!!
Title: Re: Coverage of Supreme Court hearing-DON'T POST UNLESS YOU ARE WATCHING THE HEA
Post by: André Felipe on June 10, 2009, 05:10:15 PM
Quote from: Lexi;31480
It's one thing for them to deliberately file something they know has no chance of technically succeeding, but quite another for a judge to facilitate that. That's the part I find unbelievable especially when it's at the Supreme Court level.

I think this is not entirely correct.
The ADPF would have chance of succeeding if there wasn´t no preliminary decision from TRF, and then the STF would have to decide if Sean should be in the country while still pending appeal at TRF.
 
Even Ellen Gracie had to decide to close the ADPF without analysing the merits, we can have sure she is a great defender of the Hague Convention, but the Law didn´t give her other options.
Title: Re: Coverage of Supreme Court hearing-DON'T POST UNLESS YOU ARE WATCHING THE HEA
Post by: SWEET72 on June 10, 2009, 05:10:26 PM
Posted by Raquel Vigil (http://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=770893798) on Facebook BSH Forum:
 
JUST TO CLARIFY:

There is a decision to send Sean back to the U.S. and, if that happens, there is no appeal in Brazil, there is nothing more that Brazil will do about it. Will be for the U.S. to decide about his destiny.

Because this decision is now suspended (just a suspension was canceled today but the other remains), the stepfather can appeal and the process continues. If happens that the suspension is canceled, Sean has to go bac in 48 hours doesnt mather what day is, after it is suspended...and also... with any chance of appeal, because will not be BRazilian's matter anymore.

So that is why people are saying that "he will not return until all appeals have been judged" AND THIS IS WRONG. CAN HAPPEN BUT WILL PROBABLY NOT,.... Now, with the suspension of the order of return in 48 hours, the process keeps following, but only while the decision is suspended! If it is no longer suspended, Sean will be send back in 48 hours.

Today one of the suspensions was canceled.The moast important one,the one from the Supreme Court - STF. But there is still one missing.
If the suspension of the decision continues, the process continues normally, and with so many appeals that the Lins e Silva will be entitled, may last for years!

But I'm having faith that the suspension will end, the ministers today "destroyed" all arguments of Lins e Silva. It was an incredible victory, lets keep faith!

ANOTHER THING:
Everyone knows that this family has a lot of power here in Brazil, so David is only getting these victories because USA is pressing. So my advice: Pressure your authorities, so they can presure Brasil!!
Its working but it cant stop.
Title: Re: Coverage of Supreme Court hearing-DON'T POST UNLESS YOU ARE WATCHING THE HEA
Post by: mlee on June 10, 2009, 05:10:53 PM
I've posted on the Media thread, but wanted to let you all know that HLN is now discussing the case. Call 1 877 TELL HLN to comment. I think David is supposed to be on after the commercial break???
Title: Re: Coverage of Supreme Court hearing-DON'T POST UNLESS YOU ARE WATCHING THE HEA
Post by: todez on June 10, 2009, 05:11:16 PM
Tomorrow is a holiday in Brazil, so don't count on anything getting done this week.  I wouldn't be surprised if the god-forsaken family (gsf) sweeps Sean away somewhere and uses the excuse that he's on an extended weekend vacation, just so David can't see him.  However, I believe that the courts will hear this case next week.  There is a great deal of pressure on them and the pressure has to continue from the U.S.  Depending on what the gsf is doing behind the scenes, this could continue for another month or two.  But I believe that the truth is starting to be shown too strongly for the 2nd level justices to be paid off now.  I think they know that the world will have its eyes on them and that they need to act quickly and prudently.  And having to base their decision on that of Judge Pinto's documents, I believe that they will reject the appeal and nullify the chance for any furthur appeals.  That is my hope, at least.
Title: Re: Coverage of Supreme Court hearing-DON'T POST UNLESS YOU ARE WATCHING THE HEA
Post by: carina on June 10, 2009, 05:11:19 PM
Quote from: roger;31481
I am saying that Marco Aurelio actually admitted on TV that he issued the injunction because he thought Sean could not leave the country for good before the Judge Pinto's decision received scrutiny from a higher court, and if this was something he was in a position to do, he was confortable with granting the injunction.

I take that as "helping them to buy time", as you noted.

Roger I just want to say thank you!!!! You help me understand this mess much better.
Title: Re: Coverage of Supreme Court hearing-DON'T POST UNLESS YOU ARE WATCHING THE HEA
Post by: Dan_Plainview on June 10, 2009, 05:11:43 PM
Quote from: Nicole's Dad;31456
People. Please take your hands of of this. It's in God's hands. He is watching all of this. After reading all of the posts today and the info from Andre, this is very good news for David and Sean's plight to bring him home.
 
Everyone has to remember that this hearing today was NOT about Sean coming home. It was about whether the Hague treaty is constitutional to Brazilian law at the Supreme Court level.
 
If they've ruled that it needs to go back to the second level, then that is a victory for all of us including the other Chasing Parents. This is exactly what needed to happen. It may not happen on our time or when we want it to but the appeals WILL run their course and they WILL run out. It's not a matter of if but only a matter of when Sean will be returned to David.
 
We all have to learn to be patient and wait. I know Ricardo Zamariola very well as he also represented me in my case. He is very intelligent and knows what he is doing.
 
TODAY WAS A VICTORY IN THE RIGHT DIRECTION. CELEBRATE PEOPLE!!!!!!!!!!

Amen!

Mr. Z rocks!! You are fortunate to have him representing you!!

I pray that your daughter is returned to you, and soon.
Title: Re: Coverage of Supreme Court hearing-DON'T POST UNLESS YOU ARE WATCHING THE HEA
Post by: Concerned on June 10, 2009, 05:12:02 PM
Any update on the case (as of 4 p.m. central time June 10?)
I can't understand what they're saying on the link...
 
:conf:
Title: Re: Coverage of Supreme Court hearing-DON'T POST UNLESS YOU ARE WATCHING THE HEA
Post by: Luc on June 10, 2009, 05:12:09 PM
Quote from: André Felipe;31468
It was a delay tatic indeed. JPLS/Tostes believed they could not achieve a preliminary decision ordering Sean´s stay from the TRF on time, and they were correct! The preliminary decision from TRF came at wednesday night, and Sean would be at US that time. Lucky for them they get a preliminary decision from Marco Aurelio.

Now I am even more disgusted!!! So it would be over if it wan't for this circus today? I did not know that the other preliminary decision was issued too late! I am SO disgusted by Marco Aurelio! He knew all along that what the PP was asking was wrong, he even voted against , but he did it for his FRIENDS! I am so ashamed of been a brazilian!
Title: Re: Coverage of Supreme Court hearing-DON'T POST UNLESS YOU ARE WATCHING THE HEA
Post by: carina on June 10, 2009, 05:12:48 PM
Andre you are awesome too. Between you and Roger u guys ROCK!!! THANK YOU, THANK YOU!!!!!:cheer:
Title: Re: Coverage of Supreme Court hearing-DON'T POST UNLESS YOU ARE WATCHING THE HEA
Post by: mgs2510 on June 10, 2009, 05:13:44 PM
What means this?
Besides the "liminar" granted by the TRF-2, two other actions made by the Brazilian family should be examined by the Federal Court. They asked to review the decision at first instance. "The initial goal is reached. That determination of the immediate release of the boy was suspended. The boy is not only in Brazil but there is the possibility of appeal," he adds.
http://noticias.uol.com.br/ultnot/internacional/2009/06/10/ult1859u1096.jhtm
Title: Re: Coverage of Supreme Court hearing-DON'T POST UNLESS YOU ARE WATCHING THE HEA
Post by: roger on June 10, 2009, 05:14:41 PM
Quote from: FC_Florida;31477
Grace, with the regards to Lula's passivity, I think it's going to bite on his a*** big time. I see a permanent seat in the UN Security Council flying away...

If you follow Brazilian politics, you will see that President Lula is widely known for avoiding making any tough decisions and just hates being around "sad events", unless they are directly related to himself, his family or the closest allies. In the past few months all he does is to attend cheerleading events sponsored by his allies to cheer him on. He's actually been giving interviews saying his time is almost up, he's happy with what he accomplished, etc. And this guy has 18 months to go before leaving office, but he feels so good enough about himself and his two terms in office like they are already over.

Even his supporters acknowledge that he has developed a very egocentrical personality over the years and is as politically savvy as not wanting to be associated with the consequences of "tough decisions", leaving them all for aides and ministers.

You will be astonished to learn that he has not bothered (and actually did his best to avoid) showing up at ANY MASS OR MEMORIAL SERVICE IN CONNECTION WITH THE CRASH OF AIR FRANCE 447. He just disappeared from the public eye altogether. He does not want to be associated with tragic events or controversial issues. He's always been like this, and even his closest associates acknowledge that this is Lula in his element.
Title: Re: Coverage of Supreme Court hearing-DON'T POST UNLESS YOU ARE WATCHING THE HEA
Post by: rcgracia on June 10, 2009, 05:18:15 PM
Quote from: carina;31505
Andre you are awesome too. Between you and Roger u guys ROCK!!! THANK YOU, THANK YOU!!!!!:cheer:


Thank you Andre and Roger so...much for all your help!!!!!!!:cheer::cheer:
Title: Re: Coverage of Supreme Court hearing-DON'T POST UNLESS YOU ARE WATCHING THE HEA
Post by: roger on June 10, 2009, 05:18:47 PM
Quote from: MaraVitta;31489
Well, it shows her position about the case, and once STF shall judge it in last level...

Yes, definitely.
Title: Re: Coverage of Supreme Court hearing-DON'T POST UNLESS YOU ARE WATCHING THE HEA
Post by: Lexi on June 10, 2009, 05:18:54 PM
Quote from: André Felipe;31497
I think this is not entirely correct.
The ADPF would have chance of succeeding if there wasn´t no preliminary decision from TRF, and then the STF would have to decide if Sean should be in the country while still pending appeal at TRF.
 
Even Ellen Gracie had to decide to close the ADPF without analysing the merits, we can have sure she is a great defender of the Hague Convention, but the Law didn´t give her other options.

Sorry, not to flog this point, but that's where you lose me. How can an application succeed if they decide the appeal doesn't belong in front of the STF in the first place i.e. it's not a public interest case? How does the preliminary decision from TRF change the nature of it? It's not that I don't believe what you're saying - I do - I just don't get that part of it.
 
If you don't want to explain it further, that's quite alright - I know there have been lots of questions thrown at you today.
Title: Re: Coverage of Supreme Court hearing-DON'T POST UNLESS YOU ARE WATCHING THE HEA
Post by: shanie20 on June 10, 2009, 05:22:14 PM
Quote from: Lexi;31513
Sorry, not to flog this point, but that's where you lose me. How can an application succeed if they decide the appeal doesn't belong in front of the STF in the first place i.e. it's not a public interest case? How does the preliminary decision from TRF change the nature of it? It's not that I don't believe what you're saying - I do - I just don't get that part of it.
 
If you don't want to explain it further, that's quite alright - I know there have been lots of questions thrown at you today.
I'm confused too. I thought that  the appeal is based on the concept that it's a family law issue. If today's ruling basically clarified that the Hague has to be honored then the whole premise of the appeal has no standing. Right?
Title: Re: Coverage of Supreme Court hearing-DON'T POST UNLESS YOU ARE WATCHING THE HEA
Post by: vivienne on June 10, 2009, 05:22:39 PM
Quote
You will be astonished to learn that he has not bothered (and actually did his best to avoid) showing up at ANY MASS OR MEMORIAL SERVICE IN CONNECTION WITH THE CRASH OF AIR FRANCE 447. He just disappeared from the public eye altogether. He does not want to be associated with tragic events or controversial issues. He's always been like this, and even his closest associates acknowledge that this is Lula in his element.

That's terrible. If he's not there for his countrymen when they need him, better not rely on him at all.

Thanks for the explanation, Roger.
Title: Re: Coverage of Supreme Court hearing-DON'T POST UNLESS YOU ARE WATCHING THE HEA
Post by: AnotherDad on June 10, 2009, 05:23:03 PM
This is all so sickening to me. David and Sean are merely stuck in an endless loop of mindless appeals. Again, this is like they are making their own rules as they go, and creating new appeals as needed, whenever and with whatever court. It is all just a disgusting loop. I want to vomit. This is hardly a celebration. Tosticles knew all of what happened here and it was just part of his plan. I can't even drink Diet Coke to celebrate this because it is so shallow and meaningless. So depressing to me.
Title: Re: Coverage of Supreme Court hearing-DON'T POST UNLESS YOU ARE WATCHING THE HEA
Post by: noah3698 on June 10, 2009, 05:23:33 PM
Quote from: roger;31452
Visitation has been allowed anytime, since the February decision by the Superior Court of Justice.
 
No transition at this point, though.

Visitation has been allowed by the COURTS but not necessarity by the brazilian family.  They have again and again tried to refuse David his court allowed visits with Sean and if they do allow it they interfer in other ways during the visit itself.  Despicable...
Title: Re: Coverage of Supreme Court hearing-DON'T POST UNLESS YOU ARE WATCHING THE HEA
Post by: André Felipe on June 10, 2009, 05:24:04 PM
Quote from: Lexi;31513
Sorry, not to flog this point, but that's where you lose me. How can an application succeed if they decide the appeal doesn't belong in front of the STF in the first place i.e. it's not a public interest case? How does the preliminary decision from TRF change the nature of it? It's not that I don't believe what you're saying - I do - I just don't get that part of it.
 
If you don't want to explain it further, that's quite alright - I know there have been lots of questions thrown at you today.

The ADPF can only be used if there wasn´t no other measure for what is being requested.
 
This ADPF was closed because there were already a preliminary decision from the TRF, and also some Ministers said they(JPLS/Tostes) should have used an appeal to TRF (and they used).
 
So, if there weren´t a preliminary decision from TRF, STF would give it, or would NOT, as I can not say how things would be if wasn´t the big IF.
Title: Re: Coverage of Supreme Court hearing-DON'T POST UNLESS YOU ARE WATCHING THE HEA
Post by: heatheram29 on June 10, 2009, 05:25:12 PM
Quote from: roger;31508
If you follow Brazilian politics, you will see that President Lula is widely known for avoiding making any tough decisions and just hates being around "sad events", unless they are directly related to himself, his family or the closest allies. In the past few months all he does is to attend cheerleading events sponsored by his allies to cheer him on. He's actually been giving interviews saying his time is almost up, he's happy with what he accomplished, etc. And this guy has 18 months to go before leaving office, but he feels so good enough about himself and his two terms in office like they are already over.
 
Even his supporters acknowledge that he has developed a very egocentrical personality over the years and is as politically savvy as not wanting to be associated with the consequences of "tough decisions", leaving them all for aides and ministers.
 
You will be astonished to learn that he has not bothered (and actually did his best to avoid) showing up at ANY MASS OR MEMORIAL SERVICE IN CONNECTION WITH THE CRASH OF AIR FRANCE 447. He just disappeared from the public eye altogether. He does not want to be associated with tragic events or controversial issues. He's always been like this, and even his closest associates acknowledge that this is Lula in his element.

 
Funny, that never stopped him from going to the funeral of JPLeS' grandfather!
Title: Re: Coverage of Supreme Court hearing-DON'T POST UNLESS YOU ARE WATCHING THE HEA
Post by: FC_Florida on June 10, 2009, 05:26:03 PM
Quote from: roger;31508
If you follow Brazilian politics, you will see that President Lula is widely known for avoiding making any tough decisions and just hates being around "sad events", unless they are directly related to himself, his family or the closest allies. In the past few months all he does is to attend cheerleading events sponsored by his allies to cheer him on. He's actually been giving interviews saying his time is almost up, he's happy with what he accomplished, etc. And this guy has 18 months to go before leaving office, but he feels so good enough about himself and his two terms in office like they are already over.
 
Even his supporters acknowledge that he has developed a very egocentrical personality over the years and is as politically savvy as not wanting to be associated with the consequences of "tough decisions", leaving them all for aides and ministers.
 
You will be astonished to learn that he has not bothered (and actually did his best to avoid) showing up at ANY MASS OR MEMORIAL SERVICE IN CONNECTION WITH THE CRASH OF AIR FRANCE 447. He just disappeared from the public eye altogether. He does not want to be associated with tragic events or controversial issues. He's always been like this, and even his closest associates acknowledge that this is Lula in his element.

I read about the Air France online. Parents of the victims are enraged about his absence. He prefers being around his own "pals" (Chavez e Morales) and travel to Central America rather than facing the though tasks...And Newsweek magazine applauds him as a great Chief of State! Are they out of their minds???? It's very disgusting, Roger.
Title: Re: Coverage of Supreme Court hearing-DON'T POST UNLESS YOU ARE WATCHING THE HEA
Post by: Irish17 on June 10, 2009, 05:27:31 PM
Quote from: roger;31508
If you follow Brazilian politics, you will see that President Lula is widely known for avoiding making any tough decisions and just hates being around "sad events", unless they are directly related to himself, his family or the closest allies. In the past few months all he does is to attend cheerleading events sponsored by his allies to cheer him on. He's actually been giving interviews saying his time is almost up, he's happy with what he accomplished, etc. And this guy has 18 months to go before leaving office, but he feels so good enough about himself and his two terms in office like they are already over.
 
Even his supporters acknowledge that he has developed a very egocentrical personality over the years and is as politically savvy as not wanting to be associated with the consequences of "tough decisions", leaving them all for aides and ministers.
 
You will be astonished to learn that he has not bothered (and actually did his best to avoid) showing up at ANY MASS OR MEMORIAL SERVICE IN CONNECTION WITH THE CRASH OF AIR FRANCE 447. He just disappeared from the public eye altogether. He does not want to be associated with tragic events or controversial issues. He's always been like this, and even his closest associates acknowledge that this is Lula in his element.

Roger, I have noticed this. Lula is nowhere to be found these last couple of weeks after the Air France disaster; not even at the Memorial.  However the AGU showed up today in court. Correct me if I am wrong, yet he did not show up on his choice or did he?? I would think that he was there for then just personal reasons.  
 
By the way, has anything been hitting the rumor mill about the "supposed" trip to Brazil by Obama in August??
 
Thanks again Roger, you are briliant!!
Title: Re: Coverage of Supreme Court hearing-DON'T POST UNLESS YOU ARE WATCHING THE HEA
Post by: roger on June 10, 2009, 05:29:37 PM
Quote from: Lexi;31513
Sorry, not to flog this point, but that's where you lose me. How can an application succeed if they decide the appeal doesn't belong in front of the STF in the first place i.e. it's not a public interest case? How does the preliminary decision from TRF change the nature of it? It's not that I don't believe what you're saying - I do - I just don't get that part of it.
 
If you don't want to explain it further, that's quite alright - I know there have been lots of questions thrown at you today.

I'll try to help: today the STF said that this particular appeal did not belong there.

It did not review the merits of Judge Pinto's decision, because one can't skip jurisdictions. The court that first will review the merits of Judge Pinto's decision was always the Federal Appellate Court of the 2nd. Circuit in Rio de Janeiro, where the LeS had already sought and were granted a stay of execution of Judge Pinto's ruling preventing the return of Sean before the merits are heard.
Title: Re: Coverage of Supreme Court hearing-DON'T POST UNLESS YOU ARE WATCHING THE HEA
Post by: roger on June 10, 2009, 05:32:54 PM
Quote from: Irish17;31527
Roger, I have noticed this. Lula is nowhere to be found these last couple of weeks after the Air France disaster; not even at the Memorial.  However the AGU showed up today in court. Correct me if I am wrong, yet he did not show up on his choice or did he?? I would think that he was there for then just personal reasons.  
 
By the way, has anything been hitting the rumor mill about the "supposed" trip to Brazil by Obama in August??
 
Thanks again Roger, you are briliant!!

The legal community in Brazil perceives the AGU as independent and not politically related to Lula, and that's why he didn't want to intervene in the AGU's strong upholding the Hague Convention. He just kind of let the system play out and will interfere only if it has damage potential to his political or personal ambitions. That's Lula. It's not one of his kids, after all.
Once again, I'm not playing partisan politics. I strongly believe that even his staunchest allies acknowledge this trait in his personality.
Title: Re: Coverage of Supreme Court hearing-DON'T POST UNLESS YOU ARE WATCHING THE HEA
Post by: nina on June 10, 2009, 05:33:18 PM
Some news posted 5mins ago...

Apparently, the TRF-2 will decide in the following days.

http://g1.globo.com/Noticias/Rio/0,,MUL1190408-5606,00-JUSTICA+FEDERAL+DO+RIO+VAI+DECIDIR+CASO+SEAN+NOS+PROXIMOS+DIAS.html
Title: Re: Coverage of Supreme Court hearing-DON'T POST UNLESS YOU ARE WATCHING THE HEA
Post by: Grace on June 10, 2009, 05:33:49 PM
Quote from: AnotherDad;31519
This is all so sickening to me. David and Sean are merely stuck in an endless loop of mindless appeals. Again, this is like they are making their own rules as they go, and creating new appeals as needed, whenever and with whatever court. It is all just a disgusting loop. I want to vomit. This is hardly a celebration. Tosticles knew all of what happened here and it was just part of his plan. I can't even drink Diet Coke to celebrate this because it is so shallow and meaningless. So depressing to me.

Depressing to me too AnotherDad, today was a total waste of time and resources. No serious decisions for David.
Title: Re: Coverage of Supreme Court hearing-DON'T POST UNLESS YOU ARE WATCHING THE HEA
Post by: Lexi on June 10, 2009, 05:34:17 PM
Quote from: André Felipe;31521
The ADPF can only be used if there wasn´t no other measure for what is being requested.
 
This ADPF was closed because there were already a preliminary decision from the TRF, and also some Ministers also they should have used an appeal to TRF (and they used).
 
So, if there weren´t a preliminary decision from TRF, STF would give it, or would NOT, as I can not say how things would be if wasn´t the big IF.

Ok, thanks Andre. I guess my mental block has to do with that Estadao article yesterday saying the rumor was that the STF would reject the ADPF on the basis that it shouldn't be used for individual cases that don't have implications for everyone.
 
You and Roger have done a great job of walking us through your legal system.
Title: Re: Coverage of Supreme Court hearing-DON'T POST UNLESS YOU ARE WATCHING THE HEA
Post by: noah3698 on June 10, 2009, 05:34:48 PM
Quote from: André Felipe;31468
It was a delay tatic indeed. JPLS/Tostes believed they could not achieve a preliminary decision ordering Sean´s stay from the TRF on time, and they were correct! The preliminary decision from TRF came at wednesday night, and Sean would be at US that time. Lucky for them they get a preliminary decision from Marco Aurelio.

Not so sure luck had anything to do with it.
 
This is comical, basically the STF made a decision that they should not be the ones to make the decision?!?  I am very sorry but something just does not sit right with me.  There is no way, in my opinion, that the handwritten decision by the STF judge, which was able to stop Sean's return in its tracks, was in good faith.
Title: Re: Coverage of Supreme Court hearing-DON'T POST UNLESS YOU ARE WATCHING THE HEA
Post by: Chicco on June 10, 2009, 05:36:09 PM
Quote from: André Felipe;31497
I think this is not entirely correct.
The ADPF would have chance of succeeding if there wasn´t no preliminary decision from TRF, and then the STF would have to decide if Sean should be in the country while still pending appeal at TRF.
 
Even Ellen Gracie had to decide to close the ADPF without analysing the merits, we can have sure she is a great defender of the Hague Convention, but the Law didn´t give her other options.

Andre,
 
I know in Brazil, a position can always change, influenced by the political environment but I carefully listened to every vote of the judges and the support provided by them to do so. I know two of them declined to read their votes but attached them to the process. But from the other 9 at least 5 had in their core of the support that ADPF could only be used if there were no grounds for appeal in the lower courts. Some of the votes sounded even as if they were sending a message to M.Aurelio Mello for putting them in this situation in the first place. So I am not sure the ADPF would ever succeed. I think we had a theater today and no matter what their intention was to send the case back to the Federal court in Rio. What I also believe is that if an appeal was not granted yet, they would get one tonight. I really don´t think after all we heard this Supreme would have agreed with the merit of the ADPF... We will never know.
Shame on Brazilian legislation anyway as the hits keep on coming...
Title: Re: Coverage of Supreme Court hearing-DON'T POST UNLESS YOU ARE WATCHING THE HEA
Post by: roger on June 10, 2009, 05:38:06 PM
Quote from: heatheram29;31522
Funny, that never stopped him from going to the funeral of JPLeS' grandfather!

Well, in that case we are talking about one of his staunchest supporters in the intellectual community, with access to the country's elite that turned their nose on him at that time. He does go to funerals, as long as he can profit from them, as it was the case.

Since he didn't know anyone in that plane, he just did not feel like going. As if he's president of another country. To his defense, it is not customary in Brazil, and only recently we're seeing more regularly, politicians of all parties to fly over areas plagued by natural disasters, plane crashes, etc.

But Lula, he's of a different kind. He's very, very personable and the best communicator ever to run this country. As such, he picks and chooses where and when to appear according to his political goals.
Title: Re: Coverage of Supreme Court hearing-DON'T POST UNLESS YOU ARE WATCHING THE HEA
Post by: dmdaven2 on June 10, 2009, 05:39:58 PM
MAAAAN THIS STILL ISN'T OVER!!?!?

geeeeez
Title: Re: Coverage of Supreme Court hearing-DON'T POST UNLESS YOU ARE WATCHING THE HEA
Post by: Dan_Plainview on June 10, 2009, 05:41:26 PM
Quote from: roger;31529
I'll try to help: today the STF said that this particular appeal did not belong there.

It did not review the merits of Judge Pinto's decision, because one can't skip jurisdictions. The court that first will review the merits of Judge Pinto's decision was always the Federal Appellate Court of the 2nd. Circuit in Rio de Janeiro, where the LeS had already sought and were granted a stay of execution of Judge Pinto's ruling preventing the return of Sean before the merits are heard.

Roger,

I understand all of this. Do you think the PP will pursue the unconstitutionality of the Hague in STF unattached from the AGU/ Goldman v. LeS case? Is that what you said earlier?

Today they just decided it was inappropriate to discuss the issues together, isn't that so?
Title: Re: Coverage of Supreme Court hearing-DON'T POST UNLESS YOU ARE WATCHING THE HEA
Post by: Lexi on June 10, 2009, 05:42:24 PM
Quote from: roger;31529
I'll try to help: today the STF said that this particular appeal did not belong there.
 
It did not review the merits of Judge Pinto's decision, because one can't skip jurisdictions. The court that first will review the merits of Judge Pinto's decision was always the Federal Appellate Court of the 2nd. Circuit in Rio de Janeiro, where the LeS had already sought and were granted a stay of execution of Judge Pinto's ruling preventing the return of Sean before the merits are heard.

Thanks Roger - I guess playing dumb sometimes has an upside.
 
BTW, your insights about Lula are interesting. That's something else that gives the LeS an edge - they know the dynamics of all these political relationships and where they may find a sympathetic ear.
 
But to their credit, both Zamariola and Toffoli seem exceedingly bright too.
Title: Re: Coverage of Supreme Court hearing-DON'T POST UNLESS YOU ARE WATCHING THE HEA
Post by: Claudia.Hope on June 10, 2009, 05:43:05 PM
(http://g1.globo.com/Noticias/Brasil/foto/0,,21045489-FMM,00.jpg)
David Goldman, pai biológico de Sean Goldman. durante a sessão plenária do STF, nesta quarta-feira (10) (Foto: U.Dettmar/STF)



Sean veio dos EUA com a mãe, a empresária Bruna Bianchi, há cinco anos, sem autorização do pai, que, desde então, briga na Justiça pela guarda do filho. Goldman acompanhou em plenário o julgamento do caso.
 
Por unanimidade, os ministros do STF consideraram que não havia legitimidade na ação protocolada pelo PP, pois o caso ainda tramita em instância inferior da Justiça, no caso o TRF-2, que ainda não tomou decisão final no processo.

O próprio relator do caso, Marco Aurélio Mello, votou pela extinção do processo. Quando concedeu a liminar na semana passada, ele havia dito que tomou a decisão apenas para submeter o caso a uma análise em plenário, sem que houvesse risco de o menino não estar mais no Brasil antes de uma decisão definitiva da Justiça brasileira.
Plenário
Autor da ação, o PP alegou que a decisão inicial da Justiça Federal do Rio configurava "lesão ao preceito fundamental de proteção à criança." A ordem cassada determinava a entrega do garoto ao Consulado norte-americano no Rio, em 48 horas, contadas a partir da tarde do dia 1º.

Segundo o partido, a Convenção de Haia recomenda que sejam levados em consideração aspectos psicológicos da criança envolvida. O partido defende que a opinião de Sean seja considerada, assim como análises de psicólogos. Há um laudo em que o menino teria manifestado a vontade de viver ao lado da família brasileira.

Já a AGU alega que a mesma convenção, da qual o Brasil é signatário, prevê que, em casos semelhantes ao de Sean, a criança deve ser devolvida ao país de origem para que a Justiça desse local decida sobre a guarda.
Batalha
O advogado do PP, Antonio Dunshee de Abranches, destacou que o menino “está no Brasil regularmente amparado por acórdãos e sentenças da Justiça brasileira." Ele acrescentou que a AGU não tem "qualidade" para intervir, por não ser parte no processo.
 
saiba mais



Advogado da família brasileira de Sean, Sérgio Tostes, enfatizou que um laudo feito por peritos que trabalham no caso comprova que Sean “declarou expressamente e por sete vezes que quer ficar no Brasil."

Ricardo Zamariola, advogado do pai biológico, por sua vez, alegou que o menor respondeu “tanto faz” quando indagado se queria ficar no Brasil. “Depois de uma intervenção de uma assistente técnica é que ele modificou seu comportamento. Foi como a família tivesse entrado dentro da sala”, destacou. Ele citou que a “família materna dizia que seu pai o abandonou”, fazendo uma espécie de pressão psicológica.

Também presente no julgamento, o advogado-geral da União, José Antonio Dias Toffoli, destacou que os EUA já mandaram de volta para o Brasil sete crianças brasileiras ‘que lá estavam ilicitamente.' “A criança tem um pai. Ele jamais se omitiu na sua sua atuação como pai. Cabe a Justiça conferir esse direito que ele tem de ter o seu filho em sua companhia”, disse Toffoli em plenário.

Os argumentos, no entanto, não fizeram os ministros avançarem na análise do caso, que pode até retornar ao Supremo, após a decisão final do TRF-2, mas agora só em formato de recurso extraordinário e não como arguição de descumprimento de preceito fundamental, que foi o formato da ação analisada nesta tarde.
Histórico
Bruna Bianchi se separou de Goldman e se casou de novo com um brasileiro. No ano passado, Bruna morreu durante o parto da segunda filha, e a Justiça brasileira deu ao padrasto a guarda provisória da criança. Desde então, pai e padrasto travam uma batalha jurídica pela guarda do menino. O caso começou na Justiça estadual do Rio e depois passou para a competência federal.

Com a morte de Bruna, David intensificou uma campanha para tentar levar o filho de volta para os Estados Unidos. A decisão inicial da Justiça Federal brasileira previa que o menino deveria ter um período de transição ao chegar aos EUA.

Nos primeiros 15 dias, passaria o dia com o pai americano e a noite com a família brasileira. Do 16º dia ao fim do primeiro mês, Sean passaria a dormir com o pai e a receber visitas diárias de quatro horas da família materna. A partir daí, a guarda definitiva seria do pai, e a família materna deveria pleitear à Justiça americana um regime de visitas.



http://g1.globo.com/Noticias/Mundo/0,,MUL1190209-5602,00-STF+ARQUIVA+PROCESSO+SOBRE+SEAN+MAS+LIMINAR+QUE+O+MANTEM+NO+PAIS+AINDA+VALE.html
Title: Re: Coverage of Supreme Court hearing-DON'T POST UNLESS YOU ARE WATCHING THE HEA
Post by: roger on June 10, 2009, 05:43:19 PM
Quote from: Dan_Plainview;31549
Roger,

I understand all of this. Do you think the PP will pursue the unconstitutionality of the Hague in STF unattached from the AGU/ Goldman v. LeS case? Is that what you said earlier?

Today they just decided it was inappropriate to discuss the issues together, isn't that so?

Today they said PP has no business in bringing up this discussion in the first place. That's all they said.

However, in saying that, some of the Justices gave very strong indication that they would uphold the constitutionality of the Hague Convention should an appeal on the merits of Judge Pinto's decision reach the Supreme Court again down the road.
Title: Re: Coverage of Supreme Court hearing-DON'T POST UNLESS YOU ARE WATCHING THE HEA
Post by: Chuckles on June 10, 2009, 05:46:10 PM
Quote from: AnotherDad;31519
This is all so sickening to me. David and Sean are merely stuck in an endless loop of mindless appeals. Again, this is like they are making their own rules as they go, and creating new appeals as needed, whenever and with whatever court. It is all just a disgusting loop. I want to vomit. This is hardly a celebration. Tosticles knew all of what happened here and it was just part of his plan. I can't even drink Diet Coke to celebrate this because it is so shallow and meaningless. So depressing to me.

Couldn't disagree more.  If the court had upheld the stay, there would be a whole other series of obstacles for David, as he would now be battling against the ADPF argument.  The decision squarely shoots that argument down, thus denying the LeS cabal of one weapon they might have thought they had in their arsenal.  It also means that the court of 2nd Instance is now pressured to take up review of the Pinto decision with the eyes of the world upon that three-judge panel.

Far from being "endless", there is an end in sight... it's just a matter of time and the LeS cabal must know this by now.
Title: Re: Coverage of Supreme Court hearing-DON'T POST UNLESS YOU ARE WATCHING THE HEA
Post by: MaraVitta on June 10, 2009, 05:46:38 PM
I just read this in 'Estadao':
"TRF also stated that the transition process from the maternal family to his father must be started in Brazil. Ricardo Zamariolla said this transition process shall be discussed with the boy's father who, due to professional meetings, won't be able to stay in Brazil for a long period of time."
 
I think I missed a memo... You guys know something about this decision? I mean, I knew about the first sentence, which stated that the transition process would be in USA, so I'm completely lost now...
Title: Re: Coverage of Supreme Court hearing-DON'T POST UNLESS YOU ARE WATCHING THE HEA
Post by: Claudia.Hope on June 10, 2009, 05:48:20 PM
The news are everywhere...

http://oglobo.globo.com/
STF devolve caso Sean ao TRF do Rio, que julgará se menino fica no Brasil (http://oglobo.globo.com/rio/mat/2009/06/10/caso-sean-stf-devolve-decisao-para-tribunal-regional-federal-do-rio-por-enquanto-menino-fica-no-brasil-756278984.asp)
Por unanimidade, ministros entenderam que PP usou instrumento inadequado para questionar aplicação da Convenção de Haia (http://oglobo.globo.com/rio/mat/2009/06/10/caso-sean-stf-devolve-decisao-para-tribunal-regional-federal-do-rio-por-enquanto-menino-fica-no-brasil-756278984.asp)Comente(555) (http://oglobo.globo.com/rio/mat/2009/06/10/caso-sean-stf-devolve-decisao-para-tribunal-regional-federal-do-rio-por-enquanto-menino-fica-no-brasil-756278984.asp#coment)
 
 
 
http://g1.globo.com/Noticias/Rio/0,,MUL1190408-5606,00-JUSTICA+FEDERAL+DO+RIO+VAI+DECIDIR+CASO+SEAN+NOS+PROXIMOS+DIAS.html
Justiça Federal do Rio vai decidir caso Sean nos próximos dias

TRF vai analisar medida cautelar apresentada por família brasileira.
Sentença deu 48 horas para menino ser entregue ao consulado dos EUA.
Do G1, no Rio

 


A batalha entre a família brasileira do menino Sean Goldman, de nove anos, e o pai biológico, o americano David Goldman, será decidida no Rio nos próximos dias, segundo informou um funcionário do Tribunal Regional Federal da 2ª Região.
 
O TRF-2 vai julgar a medida cautelar da família brasileira, em que é pedida a suspensão dos efeitos da sentença até o julgamento do mérito. Na prática, se o pedido for aceito pelo Tribunal, Sean ficará no Brasil até a última discussão do caso. Porém, se não for aceita, valerá a sentença do juiz da primeira instância, e o menino deverá ser entregue em 48 horas ao consulado dos Estados Unidos.
 
Como foi a suspensão provisória

Segundo o TRF, depois que o juiz 16ª Vara Federal sentenciou, na primeira instância, que o menino voltasse para os EUA (http://g1.globo.com/Noticias/Rio/0,,MUL1178888-5606,00-JUSTICA+DETERMINA+QUE+MENINO+SEAN+GOLDMAN+VOLTE+PARA+OS+EUA.html), o advogado da família brasileira entrou com um mandado de segurança com um pedido de liminar para conseguir recorrer da sentença. A liminar foi concedida e a família entrou com a medida cautelar.

Na decisão do dia 1º de junho, o juiz determinou que o menino Sean Goldman fosse devolvido ao pai biológico num prazo de 48 horas, segundo informou o advogado da família brasileira.

O juiz determinou ainda que o menino cumpriria um período de transição ao chegar nos Estados Unidos. Nos primeiros quinze dias, passaria o dia com o pai americano e, à noite, ficaria com a família brasileira. Do décimo sexto ao fim do primeiro mês, Sean passaria a dormir com o pai e a receber visitas diárias de quatro horas da família materna.

A partir daí, a guarda definitiva seria do pai e a família materna deverira pleitear à Justiça americana um regime de visitas.

No dia 2 de junho, o Supremo Tribunal Federal suspendeu a decisão da Justiça Federal que determinava a volta de Sean (http://g1.globo.com/Noticias/Mundo/0,,MUL1180553-5602,00-STF+SUSPENDE+DECISAO+QUE+DEVOLVIA+GAROTO+SEAN+AO+PAI+NOS+EUA.html). O Partido Progressista (PP) pediu no STF a permanência do menino no Brasil. O partido alegou que a decisão da Justiça Federal configura lesão ao preceito fundamental de proteção à criança.
O PP cita a Convenção de Haia, que, segundo o partido, recomenda que seja levado em consideração aspectos psicológicos da criança envolvida. O partido defende que a opinião de Sean seja considerada na decisão judicial, assim como análises de psicólogos.

Já a Advocacia-Geral da União (AGU), que enviou ofício ao STF, pedindo para ser ouvida no julgamento, alega que a mesma convenção, da qual o Brasil é signatário, prevê que em casos semelhantes ao de Sean, a criança deve ser devolvida ao país de origem para que a Justiça desse local decida sobre a guarda.

Nesta quarta-feira, o Supremo Tribunal Federal (STF) arquivou o processo movido pelo PP (http://g1.globo.com/Noticias/Rio/0,,MUL1190209-5606,00-STF+ARQUIVA+PROCESSO+SOBRE+SEAN+MAS+LIMINAR+QUE+O+MANTEM+NO+PAIS+AINDA+VALE.html), deixando a decisão sobre o futuro do menino nas mãos do TRF.
Em plenário, os ministros revogaram a decisão liminar (provisória) do ministro Marco Aurélio Mello.
Title: Re: Coverage of Supreme Court hearing-DON'T POST UNLESS YOU ARE WATCHING THE HEA
Post by: heatheram29 on June 10, 2009, 05:49:24 PM
Quote from: roger;31546
Well, in that case we are talking about one of his staunchest supporters in the intellectual community, with access to the country's elite that turned their nose on him at that time. He does go to funerals, as long as he can profit from them, as it was the case.
 
Since he didn't know anyone in that plane, he just did not feel like going. As if he's president of another country. To his defense, it is not customary in Brazil, and only recently we're seeing more regularly, politicians of all parties to fly over areas plagued by natural disasters, plane crashes, etc.
 
But Lula, he's of a different kind. He's very, very personable and the best communicator ever to run this country. As such, he picks and chooses where and when to appear according to his political goals.

That's exactly my point! The connection with the LeS family is why he's allowed this to go on so long!
Title: Re: Coverage of Supreme Court hearing-DON'T POST UNLESS YOU ARE WATCHING THE HEA
Post by: Mom25 on June 10, 2009, 05:53:17 PM
Quote from: Ceilli;31412
IMHO, Marco was just a pawn used to delay Sean's return allowing them enough time to get a stay at the 2nd level court. Well, they succeeded on that front, but will lose in the end.

unfortunately - that may have been the case... indeed... as far as todays' hearing... the 'novela' is not over yet.... now JPLS need to lose at the 2nd level court...
Title: Re: Coverage of Supreme Court hearing-DON'T POST UNLESS YOU ARE WATCHING THE HEA
Post by: ATAYLOR on June 10, 2009, 05:55:00 PM
Do we have any idea as to when they will set a date for the hearing of the next appeal?
Title: Re: Coverage of Supreme Court hearing-DON'T POST UNLESS YOU ARE WATCHING THE HEA
Post by: roger on June 10, 2009, 06:01:48 PM
Guys, I just want to say something after seeing clips of Toffoli's oral arguments: he is one of the coolest, smartest and most brilliant legal minds around.

I specifically liked the part where he says loud and clear that this very Hague Convention allowed the return of 22 kids of LBP's to Brazil.

I don't know him personally nor know people in the legal community that know him, but I am very proud, as a Brazilian lawyer, to have someone in the legal community that courageous and cooly to take a shot at the powers that be.

He has been an open candidate for the next Supreme Court vacancy with the quiet support (or at least acquiescence of President Lula). He truly deserves the seat.
Title: Re: Coverage of Supreme Court hearing-DON'T POST UNLESS YOU ARE WATCHING THE HEA
Post by: roger on June 10, 2009, 06:02:30 PM
Quote from: ATAYLOR;31566
Do we have any idea as to when they will set a date for the hearing of the next appeal?

No, there are rumors flying around in the press about a speedly ruling (next week or so). Let's wait and see.
Title: Re: Coverage of Supreme Court hearing-DON'T POST UNLESS YOU ARE WATCHING THE HEA
Post by: Bob D'Amico on June 10, 2009, 06:03:56 PM
Quote from: roger;31552
Today they said PP has no business in bringing up this discussion in the first place. That's all they said.

However, in saying that, some of the Justices gave very strong indication that they would uphold the constitutionality of the Hague Convention should an appeal on the merits of Judge Pinto's decision reach the Supreme Court again down the road.

This is why the Brazilian Judicial system is a FARCE. In the US/UK/Canada and most of Europe the supreme court of a country would not have accepted an appeal on a case in which the appellant (the Progressive Party) was not involved. A third party can only be present in a case as a "friend of the court" when there is a ongoing hearing between the two parties involved.

What makes it incredibly damning is that a Supreme Court judge granted a "stay" for his friends and blatantly admitted it was a stalling tactic. Judges are supposed to recuse (disqualify) themselves  when the have any relationship whatsoever with a case or one of the parties. In the US, Canada and UK if a judge pulled this kind of stunt he would be removed from the bench and banned from ever serving in any court.

Despicable is too kind of a word to describe this COMIC OPERA. If this continues much longer, already now nearly 5 years, Brazil will be the laughingstock of the world.
Title: Re: Coverage of Supreme Court hearing-DON'T POST UNLESS YOU ARE WATCHING THE HEA
Post by: paigefaust10 on June 10, 2009, 06:04:20 PM
Quote from: roger;31570
No, there are rumors flying around in the press about a speedly ruling (next week or so). Let's wait and see.

I hope those rumors are true...this has gone on for way too long. I think I have an ulcer...
Title: Re: Coverage of Supreme Court hearing-DON'T POST UNLESS YOU ARE WATCHING THE HEA
Post by: paigefaust10 on June 10, 2009, 06:05:33 PM
And thank you to all of those who translated and posted what was going on. That was awesome!!
 
Roger/Andre, thanks for your unofficial legal input!! I always love to hear what you have to say.
Title: Re: Coverage of Supreme Court hearing-DON'T POST UNLESS YOU ARE WATCHING THE HEA
Post by: vivienne on June 10, 2009, 06:06:28 PM
A couple more photos of David outside the courthouse:

http://www.stf.jus.br/arquivo/cms%5CbancoImagemFotoAudiencia%5CbancoImagemFotoAudiencia_AP_109440.jpg

http://www.stf.jus.br/arquivo/cms%5CbancoImagemFotoAudiencia%5CbancoImagemFotoAudiencia_AP_109439.jpg
Title: Re: Coverage of Supreme Court hearing-DON'T POST UNLESS YOU ARE WATCHING THE HEA
Post by: JamesJosephs on June 10, 2009, 06:07:05 PM
Quote from: Bob D'Amico;31572
If this continues much longer, already now nearly 5 years, Brazil will be the laughingstock of the world.

 
That is only if the world isn't crying too hard to laugh.
Title: Re: Coverage of Supreme Court hearing-DON'T POST UNLESS YOU ARE WATCHING THE HEA
Post by: lovellboys on June 10, 2009, 06:08:52 PM
Quote from: roger;31552
Today they said PP has no business in bringing up this discussion in the first place. That's all they said.

However, in saying that, some of the Justices gave very strong indication that they would uphold the constitutionality of the Hague Convention should an appeal on the merits of Judge Pinto's decision reach the Supreme Court again down the road.


Considering the comments from some of the Justices, I would hope that a speedy appeal and denial is in the works. I mean, how would any court rule against Pinto's ruling after today's events?
Title: Re: Coverage of Supreme Court hearing-DON'T POST UNLESS YOU ARE WATCHING THE HEA
Post by: roger on June 10, 2009, 06:10:25 PM
Quote from: Bob D'Amico;31572
This is why the Brazilian Judicial system is a FARCE. In the US/UK/Canada and most of Europe the supreme court of a country would not have accepted an appeal on a case in which the appellant (the Progressive Party) was not involved. A third party can only be present in a case as a "friend of the court" when there is a ongoing hearing between the two parties involved.

What makes it incredibly damning is that a Supreme Court judge granted a "stay" for his friends and blatantly admitted it was a stalling tactic. Judges are supposed to recuse (disqualify) themselves  when the have any relationship whatsoever with a case or one of the parties. In the US, Canada and UK if a judge pulled this kind of stunt he would be removed from the bench and banned from ever serving in any court.

Despicable is too kind of a word to describe this COMIC OPERA. If this continues much longer, already now nearly 5 years, Brazil will be the laughingstock of the world.

Well, today the full Supreme Court did not accept the intervention of PP and threw the case back to the Federal Appellate Court, where it should belong.
Title: Re: Coverage of Supreme Court hearing-DON'T POST UNLESS YOU ARE WATCHING THE HEA
Post by: Lexi on June 10, 2009, 06:11:22 PM
Quote from: shanie20;31516
I'm confused too. I thought that the appeal is based on the concept that it's a family law issue. If today's ruling basically clarified that the Hague has to be honored then the whole premise of the appeal has no standing. Right?

Sorry Shanie20, only just noticed this.
 
I'm going to refer you to this response from Roger. While I understand some aspects of it, there are other twists and turns that are mystifying. I suspect that has more to do with the LeS wizardry than the structure of their system.
 
http://bringseanhome.org/forum/showthread.php?t=1440&page=33
Title: Re: Coverage of Supreme Court hearing-DON'T POST UNLESS YOU ARE WATCHING THE HEA
Post by: MaraVitta on June 10, 2009, 06:15:29 PM
Quote from: Bob D'Amico;31572
This is why the Brazilian Judicial system is a FARCE. In the US/UK/Canada and most of Europe the supreme court of a country would not have accepted an appeal on a case in which the appellant (the Progressive Party) was not involved. A third party can only be present in a case as a "friend of the court" when there is a ongoing hearing between the two parties involved.
 
What makes it incredibly damning is that a Supreme Court judge granted a "stay" for his friends and blatantly admitted it was a stalling tactic. Judges are supposed to recuse (disqualify) themselves when the have any relationship whatsoever with a case or one of the parties. In the US, Canada and UK if a judge pulled this kind of stunt he would be removed from the bench and banned from ever serving in any court.
 
Despicable is too kind of a word to describe this COMIC OPERA. If this continues much longer, already now nearly 5 years, Brazil will be the laughingstock of the world.

Unfortunately, I do agree. If the appeal wasn't recognized, the second appeal would be judge after the term of 48 hours, i.e., Sean would be already in USA...
 
The dark side only needed some time, what was granted to them...
Title: Re: Coverage of Supreme Court hearing-DON'T POST UNLESS YOU ARE WATCHING THE HEA
Post by: mugsiejcu on June 10, 2009, 06:19:11 PM
Quote from: ekc;31493
I know that David lives in NJ but I know as a parent I would remain there as long as I could see my son anytime. Any thoughts or anyone out there who can one, help get him cheaper flights down there (I know they are not cheap) and two, since the flight is like a 13 hour flight is there anyone who can either put him up for longer periods of time or get him a place to stay very inexpensively? There have to be some airline workers, and or people out there with these types of pulls. Then maybe he can have overnight visits and begin really building the relationship before he brings Sean home. anyone out there who can get this info to him if we can help in this way?

 
Don't forget this guy has a mountain of legal bills, as well. He can't just not work and expect to be able to pay those bills; his lawyers I am sure charge him hours and hours every day the longer his continues. Even if he was flying/staying in Brazil for free, he'd still have to be in the US to do his job and have money to be able to bring Sean home... especially since he is in a legal wrangling with someone who has an endless flow of cash.
Title: Re: Coverage of Supreme Court hearing-DON'T POST UNLESS YOU ARE WATCHING THE HEA
Post by: pedi on June 10, 2009, 06:19:31 PM
Can you help me understand? :nixweiss:
If it is now clear (since today) that the Hague Convention is constitutional in Brazil and therefore applies in this case, what exactly is it then that still has to be tried in court (between David and the Sean's maternal family)? Isn't that now a no brainer since David is the biological father?
Am getting dizzy and lost by all the legal circus .... makes so little sense.
And then, didn't I read a while ago here in the forum somewhere, that cases, falling under the the Hague Convention, are following certain rules so that parents don't have to go through the gigantic maze of the legal system?
Title: Re: Coverage of Supreme Court hearing-DON'T POST UNLESS YOU ARE WATCHING THE HEA
Post by: Mom25 on June 10, 2009, 06:24:39 PM
Quote from: roger;31447
Of course it was delaying tactic. All of us were pointing this out in the beginning, and Justice Marco Aurelio himself confirmed this on the record in a TV interview for Globo News, Globo TV's all-news channel.

so true (Hi Roger!!)
 
You can read this from the globo site Edicao Rio de Janeiro (http://g1.globo.com/Noticias/Rio/0,,MUL1190408-5606,00-JUSTICA+FEDERAL+DO+RIO+VAI+DECIDIR+CASO+SEAN+NOS+PROXIMOS+DIAS.html)
"O próprio relator do caso, Marco Aurélio Mello, votou pela extinção do processo. Quando concedeu a liminar na semana passada, ele havia dito que tomou a decisão apenas para submeter o caso a uma análise em plenário, sem que houvesse risco de o menino não estar mais no Brasil antes de uma decisão definitiva da Justiça brasileira."
 
Marco Aurelio made this decision simply to have the case further analyzed without the risk of the boy getting out of Brazil prior to a final decision
Title: Re: Coverage of Supreme Court hearing-DON'T POST UNLESS YOU ARE WATCHING THE HEA
Post by: Lexi on June 10, 2009, 06:26:52 PM
Quote from: roger;31569
Guys, I just want to say something after seeing clips of Toffoli's oral arguments: he is one of the coolest, smartest and most brilliant legal minds around.
 
I specifically liked the part where he says loud and clear that this very Hague Convention allowed the return of 22 kids of LBP's to Brazil.
 
I don't know him personally nor know people in the legal community that know him, but I am very proud, as a Brazilian lawyer, to have someone in the legal community that courageous and cooly to take a shot at the powers that be.
 
He has been an open candidate for the next Supreme Court vacancy with the quiet support (or at least acquiescence of President Lula). He truly deserves the seat.

I feel like I'm witnessing some sort of generational battle and internal cultural divide with young Brazilian legal minds like Toffoli, Zamariola, and Pinto who fairly and brilliantly base their arguments on points of law on one side, vs. LeS, Tostes, and their enablers who are hopelessly stuck in the old way of doing things (no doubt because it works beautifully for them).
Title: Re: Coverage of Supreme Court hearing-DON'T POST UNLESS YOU ARE WATCHING THE HEA
Post by: dmdaven2 on June 10, 2009, 06:28:45 PM
Quote from: Bob D'Amico;31572
If this continues much longer, already now nearly 5 years, Brazil will be the laughingstock of the world.


They already are...and they don't care
Title: Re: Coverage of Supreme Court hearing-DON'T POST UNLESS YOU ARE WATCHING THE HEA
Post by: whartn on June 10, 2009, 06:29:47 PM
:cloud:
Quote from: dimpledoll;31455
NO, JPLS is just dragging on the ineveitable.
The rulings are favoring David every time.
If our gov't steps up to the plate, and puts a stop to their ruthless appeals, this should end quickly!
They are grasping at straws. It's time for sanctions immediately!
It is time for Obama/Clinton to stop this charade.Lula is president.He can stop this tomorrow.Pres Obama get on the phone.
Title: Re: Coverage of Supreme Court hearing-DON'T POST UNLESS YOU ARE WATCHING THE HEA
Post by: André Felipe on June 10, 2009, 06:35:28 PM
Quote from: roger;31569
Guys, I just want to say something after seeing clips of Toffoli's oral arguments: he is one of the coolest, smartest and most brilliant legal minds around.
 
I specifically liked the part where he says loud and clear that this very Hague Convention allowed the return of 22 kids of LBP's to Brazil.
 
I don't know him personally nor know people in the legal community that know him, but I am very proud, as a Brazilian lawyer, to have someone in the legal community that courageous and cooly to take a shot at the powers that be.
 
He has been an open candidate for the next Supreme Court vacancy with the quiet support (or at least acquiescence of President Lula). He truly deserves the seat.

I don´t have words to say how this guy amazed me, he is brilliant!!
 
I already liked him for somethings he said about his personality and his visions for Brazil´s Justice. He definately deserves to be the next Supreme Court Minister.
 
By the way, it was being sayed he would be choosed to replace Ellen Gracie as she was trying to get a seat at WTO.
 
I think Ellen said, between the lines, her candidature was not aprooved by other countries (USA did not support the brazilian candidate) because of the negative effects this HC´s issue is causing to Brasil.
Title: Re: Coverage of Supreme Court hearing-DON'T POST UNLESS YOU ARE WATCHING THE HEA
Post by: kmoor88 on June 10, 2009, 06:36:40 PM
Quote from: whartn;31595
:cloud:
 It is time for Obama/Clinton to stop this charade.Lula is president.He can stop this tomorrow.Pres Obama get on the phone.
:yeahthat::yeahthat::yeahthat:Let's continue to call the White House everyday until Sean comes home.
Title: Re: Coverage of Supreme Court hearing-DON'T POST UNLESS YOU ARE WATCHING THE HEA
Post by: Mom25 on June 10, 2009, 06:40:16 PM
Quote from: Duffchick;31496
This past week has been a victory for all the LBP with all the media attention. This is so wonderful!!!!

As the LBPs received attention (at least that, thank goodness!!!!) Brazil spent $$$$$$$$$ in today's hearing... "buying time" so DSide can appeal as they please...  
:cloud:
 
It really infuriates me! :burn: :burn:
Title: Re: Coverage of Supreme Court hearing-DON'T POST UNLESS YOU ARE WATCHING THE HEA
Post by: liesl78 on June 10, 2009, 06:50:24 PM
Someone posted in orkut that the injunction will be judged by the TRF in the coming days, I think they got it from a paper but I couldn't find which one.
Title: Re: Coverage of Supreme Court hearing-DON'T POST UNLESS YOU ARE WATCHING THE HEA
Post by: paigefaust10 on June 10, 2009, 06:54:16 PM
Quote from: liesl78;31601
Someone posted in orkut that the injunction will be judged by the TRF in the coming days, I think they got it from a paper but I couldn't find which one.

I think those are the "rumors" that Bob was talking about...we don't have anything official stating this. I wish though!!!
Title: Re: Coverage of Supreme Court hearing-DON'T POST UNLESS YOU ARE WATCHING THE HEA
Post by: Dan_Plainview on June 10, 2009, 06:57:45 PM
Quote from: André Felipe;31596
I don´t have words to say how this guy amazed me, he is brilliant!!
 
I already liked him for somethings he said about his personality and his visions for Brazil´s Justice. He definately deserves to be the next Supreme Court Minister.
 
By the way, it was being sayed he would be choosed to replace Ellen Gracie as she was trying to get a seat at WTO.
 
I think Ellen said, between the lines, her candidature was not aprooved by other countries (USA did not support the brazilian candidate) because of the negative effects this HC´s issue is causing to Brasil.

I would like to propose that Toffoli replace Judge Marco Aurélio Mello as soon as he is done representing David ... and that Judge Ellen Gracie remain in her position on the STF. Then they need to get to work on streamlining the return process and assuring just decisions related to the Hague.
Title: Re: Coverage of Supreme Court hearing-DON'T POST UNLESS YOU ARE WATCHING THE HEA
Post by: lisacallenwood on June 10, 2009, 06:59:18 PM
Quote from: roger;31569
Guys, I just want to say something after seeing clips of Toffoli's oral arguments: he is one of the coolest, smartest and most brilliant legal minds around.
 
I specifically liked the part where he says loud and clear that this very Hague Convention allowed the return of 22 kids of LBP's to Brazil.
 
I don't know him personally nor know people in the legal community that know him, but I am very proud, as a Brazilian lawyer, to have someone in the legal community that courageous and cooly to take a shot at the powers that be.
 
He has been an open candidate for the next Supreme Court vacancy with the quiet support (or at least acquiescence of President Lula). He truly deserves the seat.

I'm sorry I missed this today....but was CRAZY trying to get on here while it was being covered. There was a collective 'melt down' over on the BSH facebook site with those of us 'locked out'!!
 
But I'm happy to know that there is someone with the chutzpah standing up to these slimy bullies!! And someone intelligent who presents himself like Toffoli.
Title: Re: Coverage of Supreme Court hearing-DON'T POST UNLESS YOU ARE WATCHING THE HEA
Post by: vivienne on June 10, 2009, 07:06:21 PM
Another article on the aftermath of the supreme court decision:  

http://www.google.com/hostednews/ap/article/ALeqM5jcmQ0cDBNAoVaqGTzy-9CdC9gGJQD98O359G0

David's reaction to the ruling:

Quote
Nevertheless, David Goldman said he was pleased with the Supreme Court decision.


"I hope it will diminish the time away from my son."


Goldman said that the hearing also made public another issue that he said he had been legally barred from discussion previously: "The psychological damage that has been inflicted on my son is finally out in the open," he said. "There's no words to describe the anxiety and the pain that I feel from that. Fortunately, it's been exposed."
Title: Re: Coverage of Supreme Court hearing-DON'T POST UNLESS YOU ARE WATCHING THE HEA
Post by: DaniDee on June 10, 2009, 07:10:39 PM
Quote from: liesl78;31601
Someone posted in orkut that the injunction will be judged by the TRF in the coming days, I think they got it from a paper but I couldn't find which one.

 
I think they refer to this? http://g1.globo.com/Noticias/Rio/0,,MUL1190408-5606,00-JUSTICA+FEDERAL+DO+RIO+VAI+DECIDIR+CASO+SEAN+NOS+PROXIMOS+DIAS.html
Title: Re: Coverage of Supreme Court hearing-DON'T POST UNLESS YOU ARE WATCHING THE HEA
Post by: Sashia on June 10, 2009, 07:16:00 PM
Quote from: FC_Florida;31477
Grace, with the regards to Lula's passivity, I think it's going to bite on his a*** big time. I see a permanent seat in the UN Security Council flying away...

Please, Please Please, can we go back to our writing and calling campaign to prevent the Seat on the U.N .Sec. Council, Olympics, Nobel Peace Prize, and Sanctions?
Title: Re: Coverage of Supreme Court hearing-DON'T POST UNLESS YOU ARE WATCHING THE HEA
Post by: Sashia on June 10, 2009, 07:20:10 PM
Quote from: Lexi;31495
That floors me. As I said before, I'm starting to understand why the LeS are so pompous - that they could basically waste the Supreme Court's time knowing they had no business being there.

I don't think after this is over they have to worry much about court, Superior or otherwise. I bet the next case they get is where someone's dog wandered into the neighbors yard and they kept him. JP will argue he's "settled" there and insist they get the dog's testimony on camera, that he wants to stay there.:D
Title: Re: Coverage of Supreme Court hearing-DON'T POST UNLESS YOU ARE WATCHING THE HEA
Post by: André Felipe on June 10, 2009, 07:25:44 PM
Quote from: Sashia;31612
Please, Please Please, can we go back to our writing and calling campaign to prevent the Seat on the U.N .Sec. Council, Olympics, Nobel Peace Prize, and Sanctions?

well, I believe Ellen Gracie did not become a WTO´s judge because of this case.
 
Now, you people must pressure US´government to not support Brasil´s desire for other seats.
Title: Re: Coverage of Supreme Court hearing-DON'T POST UNLESS YOU ARE WATCHING THE HEA
Post by: BrazaBoy on June 10, 2009, 07:26:57 PM
The lawyer of the family of the Brazilian boy, Sergio Tostes, questioned the fact the U.S. has not signed to the last convention of the (UN) United Nations on rights of children. The convention, according to the lawyer, allows children to be heard in cases that are involved.

Congratulations to the USA. Often the children should not be heard to preserve them and not placing the burden of decision on their shoulders.
we see that in Sean's case.

Another thing that caught my attention was that fact that the lawyer of the political party started his oral argumentation saying that he was hired on the night the judge ordered the return of Sean to the USA. He said that the party's president was looking for someone with family law experience. WAIT A MINUTE!!! FAMILY LAW???? The whole point of the party being part of this mess, is because they found the judge's sentence was UNCONSTITUTIONAL. Due to the fact that the child was not heard. Since when the party was interested in the case because it likes to get involved in family matters? This is an abysmal GAFFE. It just made clear that the party's interest is in the family's favor. What i saw today was a complete waste of time of the STF, because political parties, senators, and even a minister of the supreme court, acting on behalf of a powerful family.
Title: Re: Coverage of Supreme Court hearing-DON'T POST UNLESS YOU ARE WATCHING THE HEA
Post by: Sashia on June 10, 2009, 07:29:25 PM
Quote from: Luc;31504
Now I am even more disgusted!!! So it would be over if it wan't for this circus today? I did not know that the other preliminary decision was issued too late! I am SO disgusted by Marco Aurelio! He knew all along that what the PP was asking was wrong, he even voted against , but he did it for his FRIENDS! I am so ashamed of been a brazilian!
He is, as I understand, already despised by his peers. Since he obviously knows that, he had nothing to lose and $$ to gain? I've heardhim described as an albatross and a lose cannon and a renegade.
Title: Re: Coverage of Supreme Court hearing-DON'T POST UNLESS YOU ARE WATCHING THE HEA
Post by: MaraVitta on June 10, 2009, 07:33:20 PM
Quote from: André Felipe;31620
well, I believe Ellen Gracie did not become a WTO´s judge because of this case.
 
Now, you people must pressure US´government to not support Brasil´s desire for other seats.

Yeah, although I truly believe in her competence to occupy that seat, she doesn't have a proper 'back-office'...
Title: Re: Coverage of Supreme Court hearing-DON'T POST UNLESS YOU ARE WATCHING THE HEA
Post by: Luiza on June 10, 2009, 07:41:29 PM
Quote from: ekc;31493
I know that David lives in NJ but I know as a parent I would remain there as long as I could see my son anytime.  Any thoughts or anyone out there who can one, help get him cheaper flights down there (I know they are not cheap) and two, since the flight is like a 13 hour flight is there anyone who can either put him up for longer periods of time or get him a place to stay very inexpensively?  There have to be some airline workers, and or people out there with these types of pulls.  Then maybe he can have overnight visits and begin really building the relationship before he brings Sean home.  anyone out there who can get this info to him if we can help in this way?

EKC, this is a good idea.  I don't know anyone in the Rio area, but I am sure someone on the forum would be able to help.
Title: Re: Coverage of Supreme Court hearing-DON'T POST UNLESS YOU ARE WATCHING THE HEA
Post by: dana on June 10, 2009, 07:49:03 PM
A HUGE THANK YOU to Roger and Andre for all of your help.
Title: Re: Coverage of Supreme Court hearing-DON'T POST UNLESS YOU ARE WATCHING THE HEA
Post by: kimmy on June 10, 2009, 07:49:51 PM
I like many others have been following this case daily but don't post comments much.  I just wanted to thank all of you for keeping me updated while at work.  Today's updates were especially appreciated.  I don't know how David goes on like he does.  I think this thread had more viewers in one day than any other - over 33,000.  I think it would be great if everyone following today's events could send a donation if you haven't done so.  I'm sure David is really feeling the financial hit and every little bit helps.  My envelope is already addressed.  Sean will be home soon - I only wish this was over for David and Sean.  
Kim from Rhode Island
Title: Re: Coverage of Supreme Court hearing-DON'T POST UNLESS YOU ARE WATCHING THE HEA
Post by: whartn on June 10, 2009, 07:49:54 PM
Quote from: Bob D'Amico;31572
This is why the Brazilian Judicial system is a FARCE. In the US/UK/Canada and most of Europe the supreme court of a country would not have accepted an appeal on a case in which the appellant (the Progressive Party) was not involved. A third party can only be present in a case as a "friend of the court" when there is a ongoing hearing between the two parties involved.
 
What makes it incredibly damning is that a Supreme Court judge granted a "stay" for his friends and blatantly admitted it was a stalling tactic. Judges are supposed to recuse (disqualify) themselves when the have any relationship whatsoever with a case or one of the parties. In the US, Canada and UK if a judge pulled this kind of stunt he would be removed from the bench and banned from ever serving in any court.
 
Despicable is too kind of a word to describe this COMIC OPERA. If this continues much longer, already now nearly 5 years, Brazil will be the laughingstock of the world.
I agree.When is SOS Clinton going to comment?Where is Pres Obama?This is insulting to US.Where is Lula?I can`t believe he is not able to put Sean on a plane immediately.Cong. Smith should push for sanctions asap.I am writing my Cong Rep Nancy Pelosi to step in and help Smith.
Title: Re: Coverage of Supreme Court hearing-DON'T POST UNLESS YOU ARE WATCHING THE HEA
Post by: dana on June 10, 2009, 07:54:45 PM
I just can't wrap my mind around any of this but especially this:  can Roger or Andre please explain -?  this case is under the Hague Conv and ruling regarding this- so this is not an ordinary "legal case".  This is not to determine custody, so WHY are they allowing appeals?  The appeals should be in USA/NJ.  Can they be thrown out on this basis?  This is .......
Title: Re: Coverage of Supreme Court hearing-DON'T POST UNLESS YOU ARE WATCHING THE HEA
Post by: Duffchick on June 10, 2009, 08:06:11 PM
I just wanted to say thank you to everyone who walked us all step by step through todays hearing and have come up with wonderful questions and answered our questions. You are all so wonderful!!! I love you all!!!
Title: Re: Coverage of Supreme Court hearing-DON'T POST UNLESS YOU ARE WATCHING THE HEA
Post by: LukieD on June 10, 2009, 08:10:37 PM
Quote from: Sashia;31612
Please, Please Please, can we go back to our writing and calling campaign to prevent the Seat on the U.N .Sec. Council, Olympics, Nobel Peace Prize, and Sanctions?

I think that is a VERY good idea. Back to work!
Title: Re: Coverage of Supreme Court hearing-DON'T POST UNLESS YOU ARE WATCHING THE HEA
Post by: André Felipe on June 10, 2009, 08:10:59 PM
Quote from: dana;31634
I just can't wrap my mind around any of this but especially this: can Roger or Andre please explain -? this case is under the Hague Conv and ruling regarding this- so this is not an ordinary "legal case". This is not to determine custody, so WHY are they allowing appeals? The appeals should be in USA/NJ. Can they be thrown out on this basis? This is .......

The appeals have nothing to do with the custody issue. By Law and by the Constitution, STF can not prevent JPLS to appeal, even if it´s a HC case.
Custody is not being discussed since the case was sent to Federal Justice, although JPLS try to use Family Law´s arguments.
Hague Convention does not say about appeals when the jurisdiction is being discussed by the country´s Judiciary.
If HC determined no appeals should be used against the first decision, the HC would be considered unconstitutional in many countries.
Title: Re: Coverage of Supreme Court hearing-DON'T POST UNLESS YOU ARE WATCHING THE HEA
Post by: cathlabnurse on June 10, 2009, 08:17:27 PM
Quote from: LukieD;31641
I think that is a VERY good idea. Back to work!

So what is the next step for us to work on? Please keep us posted.
Title: Re: Coverage of Supreme Court hearing-DON'T POST UNLESS YOU ARE WATCHING THE HEA
Post by: LukieD on June 10, 2009, 08:23:11 PM
Quote from: cathlabnurse;31645
So what is the next step for us to work on? Please keep us posted.

Everything Sashia suggests is fair game. I would start with the Olympics.
Title: Re: Coverage of Supreme Court hearing-DON'T POST UNLESS YOU ARE WATCHING THE HEA
Post by: FC_Florida on June 10, 2009, 08:27:57 PM
I missed pretty much the whole thing here, since the site crashed and I couldn't get in.:burn:
But to those who stayed and translated to our English-speaking friends...thank you for helping them out! Great job!
 
I am mentally and physically exhausted. I've been trying to get any glimpse of information during the whole afternoon...I was in the dark, never got the TV and Radio Justice to work properly, so I resorted to O GLobo comments for info. Had to fight those stupid comments from Elisabeth Vasconcellos e cia and Brazilians who are too busy defending their 3rd grade nationalism "verde amarelo" to think straight.

Can't imagine how David must be feeling now. We need to regroup, I don't know how's going to be our next step.  I'll come back later to join you all. Lost my focus.

Hugs to you all.:)
Title: Re: Coverage of Supreme Court hearing-DON'T POST UNLESS YOU ARE WATCHING THE HEA
Post by: Wendy on June 10, 2009, 08:28:22 PM
Quote from: Bob D'Amico;31572
. If this continues much longer, already now nearly 5 years, Brazil will be the laughingstock of the world.

TOO LATE!!!  They already ARE!!  What a joke.  
 
While I think what happened today is a good thing and a sign of things to come, I'm totally at a loss as to why THE SUPREME COURT could not unilaterally decide that this is bulls**t and just send Sean home pending appeals!
 
However, now that it's going to go back to the second level Federal court...it really must only be a matter of time.  Sean WILL be coming home.  From what I heard from the Dark Side today, their ONLY argument is to practice serious parental alienation and then insist that Sean be heard.  I don't think that's going to fly with any judge that has an ounce of sanity!
Title: Re: Coverage of Supreme Court hearing-DON'T POST UNLESS YOU ARE WATCHING THE HEA
Post by: André Felipe on June 10, 2009, 08:37:27 PM
Quote from: Wendy;31652
TOO LATE!!! They already ARE!! What a joke.
 
While I think what happened today is a good thing and a sign of things to come, I'm totally at a loss as to why THE SUPREME COURT could not unilaterally decide that this is bulls**t and just send Sean home pending appeals!
 
However, now that it's going to go back to the second level Federal court...it really must only be a matter of time. Sean WILL be coming home. From what I heard from the Dark Side today, their ONLY argument is to practice serious parental alienation and then insist that Sean be heard. I don't think that's going to fly with any judge that has an ounce of sanity!

it´s only a matter of time indeed!! and if you people continue to put this case on the press´spotlight, we will have to wait less time!
Title: Re: Coverage of Supreme Court hearing-DON'T POST UNLESS YOU ARE WATCHING THE HEA
Post by: Jackie in Upstate NY on June 10, 2009, 08:45:54 PM
Quote from: LukieD;31641
I think that is a VERY good idea. Back to work!
MY THOUGHTS EXACTLY !!!! I'm so fed-up fighting mad - and there will be a point where there will be no placating (if we aren't already there) and the repercussions from this horrid injustice won't be able to be stopped. This is not a threat, but a simple truth ! All because of a dishonest wealthy group of people that do not deserve to be considered part of the human race. Onward and forward and let the chips fall where they may - my phone calls and letters will double now !!!
Title: Re: Coverage of Supreme Court hearing-DON'T POST UNLESS YOU ARE WATCHING THE HEA
Post by: DB4 on June 10, 2009, 08:47:17 PM
Quote from: LukieD;31648
Everything Sashia suggests is fair game. I would start with the Olympics.

I'm on it!  And will ask family/friends to do the same immediately.  I'm sorry if it's somewhere on this site (there is so much here) -- would you share contact details?  Does anyone have a form letter or talking points or sample letter they sent?
 
Thanks again to everyone who posted updates from the hearing today!  It would have been difficult to wait until news reports since we were so anxious.  Real time updates allowed us to "be there" with David.  Thanks again!
Title: Re: Coverage of Supreme Court hearing-DON'T POST UNLESS YOU ARE WATCHING THE HEA
Post by: ENR on June 10, 2009, 08:49:23 PM
And to think David will have to fly home to then fly back... hopefully, they can bring this to a close in the coming days.  This is truly unbelievable that even with the world watching that this charade continues to go on.  At least this roller coaster of a justice system or injustice system I should say gives all of us a true understanding as to what David has really been up against since day 1 over the last 5 years.  He has a truly amazing inner strength that I admire and Sean seems to have it too.  We will continue to fight and never give up until David and Sean, father and son are permanently reunited.
Title: Re: Coverage of Supreme Court hearing-DON'T POST UNLESS YOU ARE WATCHING THE HEA
Post by: liesl78 on June 10, 2009, 08:49:58 PM
It's in the BSH Campaign Projects Forum
http://bringseanhome.org/forum/showthread.php?t=794
Title: Re: Coverage of Supreme Court hearing-DON'T POST UNLESS YOU ARE WATCHING THE HEA
Post by: finn on June 10, 2009, 08:51:40 PM
I would like to make a suggestion...
 
I believe that the e-mails and especially the phone calls do make a difference.  That said, could we have a collective effort for each one of these proposed efforts for each day of the week?  Maybe an individual thread on the main forum (just like the call Obama one for example).  I'm more like a foot soldier... tell me who to call and what day(Olympic comittee on Monday for example) -Cross it off my list, and wait for the next set of instructions.  I also believe that bombarding these offices on a particular day has a better impact than intermittently.
Title: Re: Coverage of Supreme Court hearing-DON'T POST UNLESS YOU ARE WATCHING THE HEA
Post by: janelr on June 10, 2009, 08:53:00 PM
I'll get right on the Olympics campaign again too - and I want to also thank all of the people who kept us up to date today with the translations as well as thank Andre and Roger (as always) for translating the lawyer!
Title: Re: Coverage of Supreme Court hearing-DON'T POST UNLESS YOU ARE WATCHING THE HEA
Post by: sharynf on June 10, 2009, 08:54:13 PM
Quote from: André Felipe;31642
The appeals have nothing to do with the custody issue. By Law and by the Constitution, STF can not prevent JPLS to appeal, even if it´s a HC case.
Custody is not being discussed since the case was sent to Federal Justice, although JPLS try to use Family Law´s arguments.
Hague Convention does not say about appeals when the jurisdiction is being discussed by the country´s Judiciary.
If HC determined no appeals should be used against the first decision, the HC would be considered unconstitutional in many countries.

May I put this into perspective based on our US court system (Andre or Roger correct me where I stray).
 
David was granted custody of Sean by a New Jersey state court, because custody is a family law issue generally governed by the state where the child resides. I say "generally" because there can be cases of custody that infringe on US Constitutional issues (e.g., the old Love case where the father was given custody of the daughter because the mother had remarried into a mixed-race marriage; found to be unconstitutional eight years later by the US Supreme court!)

David sought the return of Sean from a federal Brazilian court under the Hague Convention. In the meantime, Bruna and company sought custody of Sean in a state Brazilian court based in family law. The Brazilian state court granted Bruna custody even though it did not have jurisdiction to do so.
 
In February, the federal Brazilian court determined that the issue was a federal issue (not a state court issue) and Judge Pinto heard the matter. This would be equivalent to an US district court hearing, which is a trial court that only hears federal matters.
 
A trial court is a finder of "facts". In the US, once an US district court makes a decision (i.e., if finds the facts and applies the facts to the law), the matter can be appealed to an US Circuit Court (e.g., the US Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit). This sounds like the equivalent to Brazil's TRF where LeS has already filed their appeal.
 
In the US, a right to appeal a final decision from an US district court is automatic and an US Circuit Court has no grounds to deny a properly filed appeal, unlike the US Supreme Court that can unilaterally decided not to hear an appeal. An US Circuit Court can only hear matters regarding procedure; it cannot find new facts! An example would be that the wrong application of law was applied, inadmissable evidence was given, the jury instructions were wrong, etc. From the postings, it sounds like the same would be true of Brazil's TRF, which is important because Brazil's STF has made statements that returning a child under the Hague is procedurally proper.
 
Once an US Circuit Court has made a decision on whether the procedure was proper, a party could appeal to the US Supreme Court (sounds like Brazil's STF). The US Supreme Court can only hear constitutional matters and it can simply refuse to hear an appeal (thus the decision of the US Circuit Court is the final word).
 
If LeS tried the same tactics here, he would be appealing an US district court decision straight to the US Supreme Court (that would have rejected it outright!), trying to bypass the US Circuit Courts. If in the US, LeS would have to have filed an emergency stay of the US district court's decision pending appeal with an US Circuit Court.
 
I find it interesting that Brazil's TRF did not accept LeS' appeal until Wednesday night, which would have been after Sean had been handed over to the US Embassy had the STF not granted the appeal. It looks like they were playing it safe to not be in the spot light. By waiting until Wednesday, the TRF had the umbrella of the STF's stay and let the STF take the heat for any delay in Sean's return. If the STF had denied LeS' appeal, Sean would have been long gone by the time the TRF made a decision.
Title: Re: Coverage of Supreme Court hearing-DON'T POST UNLESS YOU ARE WATCHING THE HEA
Post by: DB4 on June 10, 2009, 08:58:56 PM
Quote from: finn;31672
I would like to make a suggestion...
 
I believe that the e-mails and especially the phone calls do make a difference. That said, could we have a collective effort for each one of these proposed efforts for each day of the week? Maybe an individual thread on the main forum (just like the call Obama one for example). I'm more like a foot soldier... tell me who to call and what day(Olympic comittee on Monday for example) -Cross it off my list, and wait for the next set of instructions. I also believe that bombarding these offices on a particular day has a better impact than intermittently.

I agree Finn.  We all rallied around calling the White House - joining forces and putting on the pressure.  Combined effort -- hitting them at once will get their attention. I would be willing to commit to 3-5 specific activities during the week.  I'm like you Finn - tell me what to do and I'll go do it!
 
Can someone define a plan for the coming week?
Title: Re: Coverage of Supreme Court hearing-DON'T POST UNLESS YOU ARE WATCHING THE HEA
Post by: forsean on June 10, 2009, 08:59:41 PM
Quote from: heatheram29;31475
But who is it that's forcing the visitations to occur in the courtyard of their condo? Is that part of the court document giving David visitation? It was my understanding that the 'family' are just insisting that he only see him in the courtyard.
 
David, stay in Brazil for now. Insist on visitations with Sean at a neutral location, and visit with him every day. If they want someone to be there then fine but tell them back the **** off.

 
And from what David's been saying, not only now, but with previous visits, Sean is always being called inside, for whatever reason, and when he returns to David, he's almost robotic, very different.  Yet again, taking time away from David to be with his son, EVEN ON HIS VISITATIONS!!!  Why are they allowed to do this?  Sean and David should spend every single second together without any interruptions from them.  It's clearly intentional and they fill his head with Lord only knows what when he is called inside.  This is infuriating!!!  They could care less the damage they are doing to this beautiful little boy!!!:madgo:
Title: Re: Coverage of Supreme Court hearing-DON'T POST UNLESS YOU ARE WATCHING THE HEA
Post by: ENR on June 10, 2009, 08:59:53 PM
Quote from: finn;31672
I would like to make a suggestion...
 
I believe that the e-mails and especially the phone calls do make a difference.  That said, could we have a collective effort for each one of these proposed efforts for each day of the week?  Maybe an individual thread on the main forum (just like the call Obama one for example).  I'm more like a foot soldier... tell me who to call and what day(Olympic comittee on Monday for example) -Cross it off my list, and wait for the next set of instructions.  I also believe that bombarding these offices on a particular day has a better impact than intermittently.


Completely agree!  I think we should continue to use the rest of this week to bombard Obama, Clinton and any other Washington officials with calls.     Then next week start in on the other campaigns for the Olympics, UN and any other efforts that Brazil may have their eyes on.
Title: Re: Coverage of Supreme Court hearing-DON'T POST UNLESS YOU ARE WATCHING THE HEA
Post by: Teena on June 10, 2009, 09:01:15 PM
Quote from: DB4;31677
I agree Finn. We all rallied around calling the White House - joining forces and putting on the pressure. Combined effort -- hitting them at once will get their attention. I would be willing to commit to 3-5 specific activities during the week. I'm like you Finn - tell me what to do and I'll go do it!
 
Can someone define a plan for the coming week?
The ladies and I are working on a plan. It should be posted in the BSH CAMPAIGN PROJECT FORUMS by tomorrow and over the next few days. There will be a couple projects. We will post them in the order of urgency.
 
For now, continue to put pressure on the White House
Title: Re: Coverage of Supreme Court hearing-DON'T POST UNLESS YOU ARE WATCHING THE HEA
Post by: Audax on June 10, 2009, 09:01:47 PM
Quote from: Wendy;31652
TOO LATE!!! They already ARE!! What a joke.
 
While I think what happened today is a good thing and a sign of things to come, I'm totally at a loss as to why THE SUPREME COURT could not unilaterally decide that this is bulls**t and just send Sean home pending appeals!
 
However, now that it's going to go back to the second level Federal court...it really must only be a matter of time. Sean WILL be coming home. From what I heard from the Dark Side today, their ONLY argument is to practice serious parental alienation and then insist that Sean be heard. I don't think that's going to fly with any judge that has an ounce of sanity!

Maybe Andre can answer this for me: Will the appeals of LeS go before the same judge that ruled in favor of David last week Monday?
Title: Re: Coverage of Supreme Court hearing-DON'T POST UNLESS YOU ARE WATCHING THE HEA
Post by: anna42 on June 10, 2009, 09:02:13 PM
Quote from: DB4;31677
I agree Finn. We all rallied around calling the White House - joining forces and putting on the pressure. Combined effort -- hitting them at once will get their attention. I would be willing to commit to 3-5 specific activities during the week. I'm like you Finn - tell me what to do and I'll go do it!
 
Can someone define a plan for the coming week?

I want to help too!  We definitely need to keep the pressure up...more so now than ever!
Title: Re: Coverage of Supreme Court hearing-DON'T POST UNLESS YOU ARE WATCHING THE HEA
Post by: momofthree on June 10, 2009, 09:02:46 PM
Quote from: Audax;31681
Maybe Andre can answer this for me: Will the appeals of LeS go before the same judge that ruled in favor of David last week Monday?


Roger answered that one...no, it goes to a higher level court.....
Title: Re: Coverage of Supreme Court hearing-DON'T POST UNLESS YOU ARE WATCHING THE HEA
Post by: André Felipe on June 10, 2009, 09:07:53 PM
Quote from: Audax;31681
Maybe Andre can answer this for me: Will the appeals of LeS go before the same judge that ruled in favor of David last week Monday?

No, but if the JPLS fills the usual kind of appeal (Apelação), Judge Pinto will analyse if it has or has not procedural mistakes, like if it was filled on time (within 15 days) and if it´s paid the fees.
 
After that analyses, Judge Pinto sends the proceeding to the second level of jurisdiction (TRF) so it will decide, and at the TRF, a Desembargador (second level judge) will make again an analyses about the procedural requirements of the appeal, before he mark on a schedule the day of the hearing/judgement.
 
That´s why I think JPLS/Tostes believed they wouldn´t achieve a preliminary decision from TRF before Sean arrives in USA, they might thought Judge Pinto or the second level judge would take too much time to analyse the appeal´s procedural requirements.
 
Now that they have got an preliminary decision from TRF, they can fill their "Apelação" without fear the lack of time to do it.
Title: Re: Coverage of Supreme Court hearing-DON'T POST UNLESS YOU ARE WATCHING THE HEA
Post by: Audax on June 10, 2009, 09:10:59 PM
Quote from: sharynf;31676
May I put this into perspective based on our US court system (Andre or Roger correct me where I stray).
 
David was granted custody of Sean by a New Jersey state court, because custody is a family law issue generally governed by the state where the child resides. I say "generally" because there can be cases of custody that infringe on US Constitutional issues (e.g., the old Love case where the father was given custody of the daughter because the mother had remarried into a mixed-race marriage; found to be unconstitutional eight years later by the US Supreme court!)

David sought the return of Sean from a federal Brazilian court under the Hague Convention. In the meantime, Bruna and company sought custody of Sean in a state Brazilian court based in family law. The Brazilian state court granted Bruna custody even though it did not have jurisdiction to do so.
 Exactly! David had legal custody of Sean from the beginning. It was due to the failure of the Brazilian Family Court that Sean is still down there. They had NO jurisdiction over the case and therefore their ruling should be nullified!
In February, the federal Brazilian court determined that the issue was a federal issue (not a state court issue) and Judge Pinto heard the matter. This would be equivalent to an US district court hearing, which is a trial court that only hears federal matters.
 
A trial court is a finder of "facts". In the US, once an US district court makes a decision (i.e., if finds the facts and applies the facts to the law), the matter can be appealed to an US Circuit Court (e.g., the US Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit). This sounds like the equivalent to Brazil's TRF where LeS has already filed their appeal.
 
In the US, a right to appeal a final decision from an US district court is automatic and an US Circuit Court has no grounds to deny a properly filed appeal, unlike the US Supreme Court that can unilaterally decided not to hear an appeal. An US Circuit Court can only hear matters regarding procedure; it cannot find new facts! An example would be that the wrong application of law was applied, inadmissable evidence was given, the jury instructions were wrong, etc. From the postings, it sounds like the same would be true of Brazil's TRF, which is important because Brazil's STF has made statements that returning a child under the Hague is procedurally proper.
 
Once an US Circuit Court has made a decision on whether the procedure was proper, a party could appeal to the US Supreme Court (sounds like Brazil's STF). The US Supreme Court can only hear constitutional matters and it can simply refuse to hear an appeal (thus the decision of the US Circuit Court is the final word).
 
If LeS tried the same tactics here, he would be appealing an US district court decision straight to the US Supreme Court (that would have rejected it outright!), trying to bypass the US Circuit Courts. If in the US, LeS would have to have filed an emergency stay of the US district court's decision pending appeal with an US Circuit Court.
 
I find it interesting that Brazil's TRF did not accept LeS' appeal until Wednesday night, which would have been after Sean had been handed over to the US Embassy had the STF not granted the appeal. It looks like they were playing it safe to not be in the spot light. By waiting until Wednesday, the TRF had the umbrella of the STF's stay and let the STF take the heat for any delay in Sean's return. If the STF had denied LeS' appeal, Sean would have been long gone by the time the TRF made a decision.
Title: Re: Coverage of Supreme Court hearing-DON'T POST UNLESS YOU ARE WATCHING THE HEA
Post by: Audax on June 10, 2009, 09:14:36 PM
Quote from: forsean;31678
And from what David's been saying, not only now, but with previous visits, Sean is always being called inside, for whatever reason, and when he returns to David, he's almost robotic, very different. Yet again, taking time away from David to be with his son, EVEN ON HIS VISITATIONS!!! Why are they allowed to do this? Sean and David should spend every single second together without any interruptions from them. It's clearly intentional and they fill his head with Lord only knows what when he is called inside. This is infuriating!!! They could care less the damage they are doing to this beautiful little boy!!!:madgo:
I noticed that too. I know David is grateful for every second he gets to spend with Sean. Isn't the interference of the Brazilian family during David and Sean's visit against the court ordered visitation guidelines??
Title: Re: Coverage of Supreme Court hearing-DON'T POST UNLESS YOU ARE WATCHING THE HEA
Post by: forsean on June 10, 2009, 09:15:52 PM
Quote from: Wendy;31652
TOO LATE!!! They already ARE!! What a joke.
 
While I think what happened today is a good thing and a sign of things to come, I'm totally at a loss as to why THE SUPREME COURT could not unilaterally decide that this is bulls**t and just send Sean home pending appeals!
 
However, now that it's going to go back to the second level Federal court...it really must only be a matter of time. Sean WILL be coming home. From what I heard from the Dark Side today, their ONLY argument is to practice serious parental alienation and then insist that Sean be heard. I don't think that's going to fly with any judge that has an ounce of sanity!

Good thought Wendy, it is only a matter of time before Sean comes home!!  Another thing that was exposed, however, is the psychological damage this family has been doing to Sean.  It was said that when the psychologist asked Sean in which country he'd prefer to live in, Sean responded "it makes no difference to me. it's up to the judge."  It's unfortunate they are inflicting psychological damage and playing head games with Sean but fortunate that it has been exposed!
Title: Re: Coverage of Supreme Court hearing-DON'T POST UNLESS YOU ARE WATCHING THE HEA
Post by: petekaplan on June 10, 2009, 09:17:05 PM
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Superior_Court_of_Justice_(Brazil)
Title: Re: Coverage of Supreme Court hearing-DON'T POST UNLESS YOU ARE WATCHING THE HEA
Post by: André Felipe on June 10, 2009, 09:23:12 PM
Quote from: sharynf;31676
.....................................................................................
A trial court is a finder of "facts". In the US, once an US district court makes a decision (i.e., if finds the facts and applies the facts to the law), the matter can be appealed to an US Circuit Court (e.g., the US Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit). This sounds like the equivalent to Brazil's TRF where LeS has already filed their appeal.
 
In the US, a right to appeal a final decision from an US district court is automatic and an US Circuit Court has no grounds to deny a properly filed appeal, unlike the US Supreme Court that can unilaterally decided not to hear an appeal. An US Circuit Court can only hear matters regarding procedure; it cannot find new facts!
 
........................ ........................ ........................ ......................
.

In Brasil, using your words, the first level of jurisdiction (Judge Pinto) is a "finder of facts". TRF, STJ and STF can not produce evidences about facts, they can only make analyses about a matter of Law (interpretations, different understandings between TRFs Courts, etc).
 
There are some very few exceptions that I dont think will hapen with this case.
Title: Re: Coverage of Supreme Court hearing-DON'T POST UNLESS YOU ARE WATCHING THE HEA
Post by: forsean on June 10, 2009, 09:29:30 PM
Quote from: Audax;31710
I noticed that too. I know David is grateful for every second he gets to spend with Sean. Isn't the interference of the Brazilian family during David and Sean's visit against the court ordered visitation guidelines??

 
That's a great question!...I'd like the answer to that too.  Then again, they're known to go "against" guidelines, laws, rules, etc.   It's mind-boggling what they continue to get away with.
Title: Re: Coverage of Supreme Court hearing-DON'T POST UNLESS YOU ARE WATCHING THE HEA
Post by: DB4 on June 10, 2009, 09:36:43 PM
I'm so glad David was able to be there and show that he will continue to fight for Sean.  Does anyone know if JPLS was in there?  I saw some posts re: JPLS possibly speaking.  I didn't follow the entire session -- was it just the lawyers that spoke?
Title: Re: Coverage of Supreme Court hearing-DON'T POST UNLESS YOU ARE WATCHING THE HEA
Post by: dana on June 10, 2009, 09:42:04 PM
Quote from: André Felipe;31642
The appeals have nothing to do with the custody issue. By Law and by the Constitution, STF can not prevent JPLS to appeal, even if it´s a HC case.
Custody is not being discussed since the case was sent to Federal Justice, although JPLS try to use Family Law´s arguments.
Hague Convention does not say about appeals when the jurisdiction is being discussed by the country´s Judiciary.
If HC determined no appeals should be used against the first decision, the HC would be considered unconstitutional in many countries.

 
Thanks Andre ~  if this appeal is denied or can it be denied, that's the end - correct?!?
Title: Re: Coverage of Supreme Court hearing-DON'T POST UNLESS YOU ARE WATCHING THE HEA
Post by: cathlabnurse on June 10, 2009, 09:43:30 PM
Quote from: forsean;31722
That's a great question!...I'd like the answer to that too.  Then again, they're known to go "against" guidelines, laws, rules, etc.   It's mind-boggling what they continue to get away with.

You are so right, they do not have respect to the rule of law and they are protected by their lawyers who only think of the financial gain. I wondered if they have children and know the feeling of  being a parent.
Title: Re: Coverage of Supreme Court hearing-DON'T POST UNLESS YOU ARE WATCHING THE HEA
Post by: André Felipe on June 10, 2009, 09:51:52 PM
Quote from: DB4;31727
I'm so glad David was able to be there and show that he will continue to fight for Sean. Does anyone know if JPLS was in there? I saw some posts re: JPLS possibly speaking. I didn't follow the entire session -- was it just the lawyers that spoke?

The STF´s website said JPLS and David requested speaking, but seems Marco Aurelio only allowed the lawyers to speak (I would do the same).
 
The TV only showed David´s face, I didn´t see images of JPLS, I think he wasn´t there...
 
Quote from: dana;31729
Thanks Andre ~ if this appeal is denied or can it be denied, that's the end - correct?!?

unfortunately, no dana. When JPLS loose at TRF (I strongly believe he will loose), he can appeal to STJ or STF, together.
 
but this case is now a "hot potato" (do you people know this expression?), as everyone wants to keep it less time than possible.
 
So I believe every levels will decide this case faster than the usual.
Title: Re: Coverage of Supreme Court hearing-DON'T POST UNLESS YOU ARE WATCHING THE HEA
Post by: dana on June 10, 2009, 09:54:05 PM
Quote from: André Felipe;31734
The STF´s website said JPLS and David requested speaking, but seems Marco Aurelio only allowed the lawyers to speak (I would do the same).
 
The TV only showed David´s face, I didn´t see images of JPLS, I think he wasn´t there...
 
 
 
unfortunately, no dana. When JPLS loose at TRF (I strongly believe he will loose), he can appeal to STJ or STF, together.
 
but this case is now a "hot potato" (do you people know this expression?), as everyone wants to keep it less time than possible.
 
So I believe every levels will decide this case faster than the usual.

 
Thank you!  Unfortunately that's not what I wanted you to say.
When will this end?!?
Title: Re: Coverage of Supreme Court hearing-DON'T POST UNLESS YOU ARE WATCHING THE HEA
Post by: André Felipe on June 10, 2009, 09:56:51 PM
Quote from: dana;31736
Thank you! Unfortunately that's not what I wanted you to say.
When will this end?!?

I hope in this same year...
Title: Re: Coverage of Supreme Court hearing-DON'T POST UNLESS YOU ARE WATCHING THE HEA
Post by: UD_student on June 10, 2009, 09:57:59 PM
Quote from: dana;31729
Thanks Andre ~  if this appeal is denied or can it be denied, that's the end - correct?!?

Here is Roger's answer from earlier in the thread about what happens if the appeal is denied by the TRF, which is the appeals court for two Brazillian states. It is for hearing appeals of decisions made by Federal Judges at Judge Pinto's level. (I think that is what Andre and Roger said, but if anyone can find their post and it contradicts that, please post that!)

 [quote="roger;31473]They can appeal to the 3rd level, the Superior Court of Justice. And simultaneously to a parallel 3rd. leve, but this time on constitutional grounds: the very same Supreme Court, which today did not review the merits of Judge Pinto's decision.[/quote]

Andre had a post earlier stating the appeals process '
[FONT="]normal "way" Judge Pinto - TRF - STJ - STF.' (It takes while to find all the posts, so I haven't quoted him using the forum quote function. I hope this helps :)
 
Whoops, I took too long finding posts and Andre answered this already, sorry!
 [/FONT]
Title: Re: Coverage of Supreme Court hearing-DON'T POST UNLESS YOU ARE WATCHING THE HEA
Post by: André Felipe on June 10, 2009, 10:05:23 PM
it´s correct, ud_student.
Title: Re: Coverage of Supreme Court hearing-DON'T POST UNLESS YOU ARE WATCHING THE HEA
Post by: TomD on June 10, 2009, 10:09:23 PM
Quote from: André Felipe;31497
I think this is not entirely correct.
The ADPF would have chance of succeeding if there wasn´t no preliminary decision from TRF, and then the STF would have to decide if Sean should be in the country while still pending appeal at TRF.
 
Even Ellen Gracie had to decide to close the ADPF without analysing the merits, we can have sure she is a great defender of the Hague Convention, but the Law didn´t give her other options.
It's great that Justice Gracie says Brasil should honor the HC, but she must be aware that the time for returning the child is emphatically stated as "forthwith" (immdediately), and at most 6 weeks, not 6 years. So even if the courts eventually rule that Sean should go home to New Jersey, that decision, while welcome and long-overdue, would not qualify as honoring the HC.
 
Is that what Brasil wants the other chasing/LBP's to face, a system that delays justice by allowing judicial abuse (with no consequences to the abusers), while the children suffer parental alienation and child abuse? That judicial system with respect to the HC is clearly broken and needs to be fixed.
 
Now that judge Pinto has so clearly stated the correct actions in his order, why must his just decison be allowed to be defeated by indeterminate delays?
 
I know Roger and Andre Felipe say that the independent judiciary must give the LeS party their full rights under the constitution, and it is required by the rule of law. Further, I have heard it stated that the exact same principle applies in the legal/judicial system of any democtratic republic, including the USA where the same type of appeals are allowed and implying the attendant delays are simply a part of the process.
 
I respectfully disagree that Brasil is following a democratic model of judicial justice. The system needs real respect for the law (especially the 6 weeks part of this law, as well as allowing incompetant judges to assume jurisdiction and mis-interpret the law), because as Congressman Smith said, "Justice delayed is justice denied."
 
I truly hope that Roger and Andre Felipe, the EyeLegal team and other ethical attorney's, judges, scholars of jurisprudence in Brasil will step up and lead the fight for reform of this system in the near future.  I am aware that this is much easier said than done and I thank our friends for educating us on the enormous obstacles that are against such a reform.  I hope and pray that it can be done.
Title: Re: Coverage of Supreme Court hearing-DON'T POST UNLESS YOU ARE WATCHING THE HEA
Post by: finn on June 10, 2009, 10:15:30 PM
Andre,
 
So they can just keep appealing all the way up the line even if each one is denied, just to buy more time with Sean?  And if the answer to this is yes, then that's why you keep saying you hope it is over THIS year?
Title: Re: Coverage of Supreme Court hearing-DON'T POST UNLESS YOU ARE WATCHING THE HEA
Post by: André Felipe on June 10, 2009, 10:17:25 PM
TomD, I hope you won´t have too wait too much to time to read Ellen Gracie´s statemens, it was beautiful!
 
she also said about the slowness on Brazilian´s Court (and the mistakes come from the State Justice).
 
I think the problem is not about the appeals, the problem is the time the Courts take to analyse it.
 
This slowness happens in many countries, like Italy, and I also read an article saying there is also slowness in U.S about analysing appeals.
 
But I don´t know if there is a country that takes more time than Brasil to decide about a HC case. peharps Mexico..
Title: Re: Coverage of Supreme Court hearing-DON'T POST UNLESS YOU ARE WATCHING THE HEA
Post by: André Felipe on June 10, 2009, 10:21:15 PM
Quote from: finn;31748
Andre,
 
So they can just keep appealing all the way up the line even if each one is denied, just to buy more time with Sean?
Yes.
 And if the answer to this is yes, then that's why you keep saying you hope it is over THIS year?
Yes, because seems to me no Court from this country wants to keep with this case too much time, they want this case out of their desk as soon as possible. This case has huge proportions now, no judge likes be the center of media attention waiting for a decision.
 
Probably this case will have to pass through TRF, STJ and STF, that´s why I hope Sean retunr in this year...
Title: Re: Coverage of Supreme Court hearing-DON'T POST UNLESS YOU ARE WATCHING THE HEA
Post by: finn on June 10, 2009, 10:22:31 PM
I think all the Brazilians should get on the AGU and child protective services in Brazil and have them investigate each and every pending Hague Convention case for Child Abuse (Parental Alienation)!
Title: Re: Coverage of Supreme Court hearing-DON'T POST UNLESS YOU ARE WATCHING THE HEA
Post by: SteveW on June 10, 2009, 10:24:31 PM
I found it telling that Tostes and the PP lawyer did not appear to even make an attempt to win this appeal today.  If they had, they would have concentrated on the "unconstitutionality" of the Hague and its broader impact. But instead, nearly all of their argument dealth specifically with Sean.  They had to know this would happen AND that they would be scolded, but they just didn't care. It was what it was intended to be - a complete waste of the courts time for the purposes of a delay.
 
Can you imagine what would happen if someone attempted to waste the time of the U.S. Supreme Court in order to manipulate the justice system?  Bob's right, they would be disbarred.
 
I'm a bit surprised that Dr. Z argued that this wasn't the correct forum. I'm not a legal expert, but I would have argued that, hey, maybe its not the correct forum but they asked for it, so lets get this over with. You're the highest court, so make the final decision and end this tragedy now.
 
So now it seems like two more rounds of appeals. Maybe two or three months each at worst, I'd guess.
Title: Re: Coverage of Supreme Court hearing-DON'T POST UNLESS YOU ARE WATCHING THE HEA
Post by: DB4 on June 10, 2009, 10:25:49 PM
Quote from: André Felipe;31751
TomD, I hope you won´t have too wait too much to time to read Ellen Gracie´s statemens, it was beautiful!
 
she also said about the slowness on Brazilian´s Court (and the mistakes come from the State Justice).
 
I think the problem is not about the appeals, the problem is the time the Courts take to analyse it.
 
This slowness happens in many countries, like Italy, and I also read an article saying there is also slowness in U.S about analysing appeals.
 
But I don´t know if there is a country that takes more time than Brasil to decide about a HC case. peharps Mexico..

I'm not surprised about slow decision-making in the courts, but this just makes my blood boil!  While it never should have taken 5 years to get to this point period, the fact that Bruna died last year and Sean was left with only one living parent (David, not JPLS) --- just out of human decency, the courts should have expedited the process.  I know, I know -- probably not realistic as this isn't the only thing they are dealing with.
 
This is unjust on so many levels!
Title: Re: Coverage of Supreme Court hearing-DON'T POST UNLESS YOU ARE WATCHING THE HEA
Post by: finn on June 10, 2009, 10:28:19 PM
But Andre-
When you say this year...there are almost 6 more months to this year???  I think most of us are hoping for a worst case scenario of WEEKS, not MONTHS.  If there could be 4 potential courts to appeal to, would each of those courts act on this case in a matter of days, weeks, or months?
Title: Re: Coverage of Supreme Court hearing-DON'T POST UNLESS YOU ARE WATCHING THE HEA
Post by: SteveW on June 10, 2009, 10:30:56 PM
Quote from: Nicole's Dad;31456
People. Please take your hands of of this. It's in God's hands. He is watching all of this. After reading all of the posts today and the info from Andre, this is very good news for David and Sean's plight to bring him home.
I agree with you, Nicole's Dad, that this is in God's hands.  But I also believe that all of us who are compelled to get involved, to work positively, to seek justice ARE God's hands in this affair.  God often choses to work through his people!
 
Given the tone of what has happened the last few weeks I don't expect JPLS to win another appeal, and Sean will be home in a few months as most.
 
I also think its fantastic that sanctions were introduced before the summer recess. Let that hang over their heads while they decide.
Title: Re: Coverage of Supreme Court hearing-DON'T POST UNLESS YOU ARE WATCHING THE HEA
Post by: joey2051 on June 10, 2009, 10:31:54 PM
How were her statements beautiful when the accomplished nothing.  One of the highest judges in Brasil acknowledged the problem, but yet, it is going back into the same cycle that she just attacked.  Now even the judiciary, along with the federal gov has acknowledged the problem but yet nothing still is happening.  I fail too see the beauty in that.  All she is doing is covering her as* , so when next spot in WTO comes up she can say she supported David the whole entire time.
Title: Re: Coverage of Supreme Court hearing-DON'T POST UNLESS YOU ARE WATCHING THE HEA
Post by: mfer on June 10, 2009, 10:32:36 PM
Quote from: LukieD;31641
I think that is a VERY good idea. Back to work!

Yes back to work.  Please visit BSH Campaign Projects (http://bringseanhome.org/forum/forumdisplay.php?f=5) for our new effort to contact the IOC.  Lets mount a HUGE response in the coming days send a LOUD & CLEAR message to Brazil we will not accept any more delays.  BRING SEAN HOME NOW!!!  More to come....
Title: Re: Coverage of Supreme Court hearing-DON'T POST UNLESS YOU ARE WATCHING THE HEA
Post by: André Felipe on June 10, 2009, 10:35:26 PM
Quote from: SteveW;31755
I found it telling that Tostes and the PP lawyer did not appear to even make an attempt to win this appeal today. If they had, they would have concentrated on the "unconstitutionality" of the Hague and its broader impact. But instead, nearly all of their argument dealth specifically with Sean. They had to know this would happen AND that they would be scolded, but they just didn't care. It was what it was intended to be - a complete waste of the courts time for the purposes of a delay.
 
Can you imagine what would happen if someone attempted to waste the time of the U.S. Supreme Court in order to manipulate the justice system? Bob's right, they would be disbarred.
 
I'm a bit surprised that Dr. Z argued that this wasn't the correct forum. I'm not a legal expert, but I would have argued that, hey, maybe its not the correct forum but they asked for it, so lets get this over with. You're the highest court, so make the final decision and end this tragedy now.
 
So now it seems like two more rounds of appeals. Maybe two or three months each at worst, I'd guess.

According to the previous decisions made by STF on others ADPFs, Zamariola was entirely correct.
Even if the Ministers wanted Sean return, by Law, they could not do that yesterday.
 
Quote from: DB4;31757
I'm not surprised about slow decision-making in the courts, but this just makes my blood boil! While it never should have taken 5 years to get to this point period, the fact that Bruna died last year and Sean was left with only one living parent (David, not JPLS) --- just out of human decency, the courts should have expedited the process. I know, I know -- probably not realistic as this isn't the only thing they are dealing with.
 
This is unjust on so many levels!

Actually, saying this proceedings is taking 5 or more years is not correct, not entirely.
 
It´s about two proceedings: David x Bruna and now David x JPLS.
 
David x Bruna took too long, initiated in the middle of 2004 and ended in the beggining of 2008, january I think.
 
David x JPLS started on october 2008, I think. And only on February 2009 Judge Pinto could actually work with no disturb from State Justice.
 
Technicaly, this proceeding only has some months.
And it will take less time than the previous.
Title: Re: Coverage of Supreme Court hearing-DON'T POST UNLESS YOU ARE WATCHING THE HEA
Post by: Lexi on June 10, 2009, 10:37:59 PM
Quote from: SteveW;31755
I found it telling that Tostes and the PP lawyer did not appear to even make an attempt to win this appeal today. If they had, they would have concentrated on the "unconstitutionality" of the Hague and its broader impact. But instead, nearly all of their argument dealth specifically with Sean. They had to know this would happen AND that they would be scolded, but they just didn't care. It was what it was intended to be - a complete waste of the courts time for the purposes of a delay.
 
Can you imagine what would happen if someone attempted to waste the time of the U.S. Supreme Court in order to manipulate the justice system? Bob's right, they would be disbarred.
 
I'm a bit surprised that Dr. Z argued that this wasn't the correct forum. I'm not a legal expert, but I would have argued that, hey, maybe its not the correct forum but they asked for it, so lets get this over with. You're the highest court, so make the final decision and end this tragedy now.
 
So now it seems like two more rounds of appeals. Maybe two or three months each at worst, I'd guess.

Agreed. There may be some variances in the levels of enforcement related to influence-peddling etc. in the US, Canada, and the UK - from what I can tell the US is generally more aggressive and competent with white collar cases than the other two - but good grief, a judge who actually admitted to something along those lines on national TV would never get away with it.
 
And here I was tiptoeing around the issue last week because I thought it might be out of line to suggest such impropiety about a sitting supreme court judge. Well, he just comes right out and says it.
Title: Re: Coverage of Supreme Court hearing-DON'T POST UNLESS YOU ARE WATCHING THE HEA
Post by: ChristineS on June 10, 2009, 10:39:10 PM
Quote from: SteveW;31755
So now it seems like two more rounds of appeals. Maybe two or three months each at worst, I'd guess.

 
Completely unacceptable.  
We'll never stand for this.  The federal judge and the Supreme Court have spoken, and Sean still is not being sent home.  How can this be?
Now BSH, the US goverment, and the good people of Brazil must speak LOUD and CLEAR.  Days, not months, until Sean comes home.
 
Power up people.  What do we do next?!!?!?!?!?!
Title: Re: Coverage of Supreme Court hearing-DON'T POST UNLESS YOU ARE WATCHING THE HEA
Post by: André Felipe on June 10, 2009, 10:40:27 PM
Quote from: finn;31758
But Andre-
When you say this year...there are almost 6 more months to this year??? I think most of us are hoping for a worst case scenario of WEEKS, not MONTHS. If there could be 4 potential courts to appeal to, would each of those courts act on this case in a matter of days, weeks, or months?

each one act in a matter of days...due the magnitude of this case, it´s possible, but trying to guess how long it will take is too dificult.
Title: Re: Coverage of Supreme Court hearing-DON'T POST UNLESS YOU ARE WATCHING THE HEA
Post by: Odete on June 10, 2009, 10:41:04 PM
Quote from: Bob D'Amico;31572
This is why the Brazilian Judicial system is a FARCE. In the US/UK/Canada and most of Europe the supreme court of a country would not have accepted an appeal on a case in which the appellant (the Progressive Party) was not involved. A third party can only be present in a case as a "friend of the court" when there is a ongoing hearing between the two parties involved.
 
What makes it incredibly damning is that a Supreme Court judge granted a "stay" for his friends and blatantly admitted it was a stalling tactic. Judges are supposed to recuse (disqualify) themselves when the have any relationship whatsoever with a case or one of the parties. In the US, Canada and UK if a judge pulled this kind of stunt he would be removed from the bench and banned from ever serving in any court.
 
Despicable is too kind of a word to describe this COMIC OPERA. If this continues much longer, already now nearly 5 years, Brazil will be the laughingstock of the world.

I totally agree. Big circus for nothing.
Title: Re: Coverage of Supreme Court hearing-DON'T POST UNLESS YOU ARE WATCHING THE HEA
Post by: joey2051 on June 10, 2009, 10:50:47 PM
There was an article posted on facebook about a transition period in Brasil.........who ordered(or suggested) this??????
Title: Re: Coverage of Supreme Court hearing-DON'T POST UNLESS YOU ARE WATCHING THE HEA
Post by: André Felipe on June 10, 2009, 11:02:45 PM
Quote from: joey2051;31773
There was an article posted on facebook about a transition period in Brasil.........who ordered(or suggested) this??????

I read somewhere it was sugested by a second level judge. And zamariola said it can not be done as David doesn´t have money to be in Brasil during the transition period.
 
If it´s true, it is a signal the second level will also decide Sean must return.
Title: Re: Coverage of Supreme Court hearing-DON'T POST UNLESS YOU ARE WATCHING THE HEA
Post by: ekc on June 10, 2009, 11:13:32 PM
I posted something similar earlier but I want to post it again.  If my son were in Brazil, 13 hrs away by plane, I would want to stay regardless of business dealings here.  I was wondering if anyone had any ways to get him free or inexpensive lodging while there so he can stay and visit sean whenever he needed to?  Also, if anyone is an airline employee and can possibly get him some less expensive or comped flights....I do not want to try to get ahold of him but was wondering if someone has contact with him so that we can coordinate this for him.  I would not want to work during something like this so I am even wondering if someone could have a job for him when this is over as well?  Basically I am hoping there is a way that if he wants to stay down there indefinitely that he can. Let me know your thoughts and if someone has contact with him how he would like this done...he should try to see sean every day if he can to get that relationship even stronger than it already is.
Title: Re: Coverage of Supreme Court hearing-DON'T POST UNLESS YOU ARE WATCHING THE HEA
Post by: ekc on June 10, 2009, 11:17:54 PM
and just another word....like that case where that journalist was held then suddenly let go last month, I think it was in Iran, notice no one  heard rumblings that it was going to happen.  It just did. There are politicians and leaders out there behind the scenes trying to make this all happen.  I am sure they are all in contact.  Someday we just might get word that Sean is coming home out of the blue.  At first I thought Obama or Hillary had no "cajones" to get the job done, but then I realize that I would not know about it anyway if it were being discussed.  It happens behind the scenes. But God will let it happen.  And the homecoming will be better than anything anyone could ever imagine.  And after it happens, I do not want to hear David or seans name every again....because that means they are happy and living the lives they deserve to live.
Title: Re: Coverage of Supreme Court hearing-DON'T POST UNLESS YOU ARE WATCHING THE HEA
Post by: Lexi on June 10, 2009, 11:18:04 PM
Quote from: roger;31532
The legal community in Brazil perceives the AGU as independent and not politically related to Lula, and that's why he didn't want to intervene in the AGU's strong upholding the Hague Convention. He just kind of let the system play out and will interfere only if it has damage potential to his political or personal ambitions. That's Lula. It's not one of his kids, after all.
Once again, I'm not playing partisan politics. I strongly believe that even his staunchest allies acknowledge this trait in his personality.

 
Roger,
 
I’m directing this post to you since you have gone down the road of discussing what motivates Lula and I think that’s a worthwhile exercise. Pls. bear with me - it’s a little long and winding.
 
After he returned from Washington, I suspected he wasn’t likely to intervene in this case publicly and ensure that Sean got repatriated immediately because that would potentially contradict his assertion that Brazil has an independent judiciary, it would be a very public admission that this case was bungled either through judicial inefficiencies and/or corruption, and it would perhaps look like he was too quickly capitulating to the US - the latter especially unacceptable given he’s friends with Chavez and also, Brazil’s leadership position on the continent). That’s my take anyway.
 
The flip side of it is that Lula also said this case was a pain, Brazil is now getting a lot of negative press from this (and it’s likely to snowball the longer this drags out), Toffoli seems to be aggressively advocating for Sean’s return which presumably implies Lula’s indirect backing, the US has now started the process for sanctions, and the overall negative ripple effect could also compromise Brazil’s bid for the Olympics, UN seat etc. And all of this during his last year and a half in office which could damage his legacy.
 
Based on what you said, Lula doesn’t normally get involved in "sad issues", he probably doesn’t see any personal or political advantage in getting directly involved in this case and was just sort of sitting back and letting things play out. I said something along the same lines a few days ago but it was more conjecture on my part.
 
Here’s the part where it gets a little murky for me. On balance, given the negatives that I listed above, wouldn’t you say that Lula probably wants this resolved for David and out of the way since he has nothing to gain (that I can think of), but potentially something to lose by this continuing? And if that’s the case, do you think his political enemies or perhaps just critics (I’m presuming he has some), would be inclined to help the LeS, drag this out and embarrass/aggravate/tarnish Lula in the process?
 
I’d be interested in hearing what you think. If that’s the case, perhaps we can ratchet up the pressure in (above-board) ways that would impel him to take a more active role even if it’s behind the scenes. Not only just impel, but also at the same time sort of provide him with a justifiable political reason why he has to intervene. An exit strategy of sorts.
 
(I know it may seem like I’m just aimlessly following a trail of jellybeans to nowhere but I’m not. The answers are not necessarily easy or straightforward, but perhaps gaining a better understanding of these dynamics would help better direct our efforts).
Title: Re: Coverage of Supreme Court hearing-DON'T POST UNLESS YOU ARE WATCHING THE HEA
Post by: Chuckles on June 10, 2009, 11:21:03 PM
Quote from: ekc;31778
I posted something similar earlier but I want to post it again.  If my son were in Brazil, 13 hrs away by plane, I would want to stay regardless of business dealings here.  I was wondering if anyone had any ways to get him free or inexpensive lodging while there so he can stay and visit sean whenever he needed to?  Also, if anyone is an airline employee and can possibly get him some less expensive or comped flights....I do not want to try to get ahold of him but was wondering if someone has contact with him so that we can coordinate this for him.  I would not want to work during something like this so I am even wondering if someone could have a job for him when this is over as well?  Basically I am hoping there is a way that if he wants to stay down there indefinitely that he can. Let me know your thoughts and if someone has contact with him how he would like this done...he should try to see sean every day if he can to get that relationship even stronger than it already is.
If anyone wants to make such an offer they can contact the correct people via the email address on the main contact page for the site; it will quickly be sent to the right people.
Title: Re: Coverage of Supreme Court hearing-DON'T POST UNLESS YOU ARE WATCHING THE HEA
Post by: LAB on June 10, 2009, 11:21:58 PM
Quote from: ekc;31778
I posted something similar earlier but I want to post it again. If my son were in Brazil, 13 hrs away by plane, I would want to stay regardless of business dealings here. I was wondering if anyone had any ways to get him free or inexpensive lodging while there so he can stay and visit sean whenever he needed to? Also, if anyone is an airline employee and can possibly get him some less expensive or comped flights....I do not want to try to get ahold of him but was wondering if someone has contact with him so that we can coordinate this for him. I would not want to work during something like this so I am even wondering if someone could have a job for him when this is over as well? Basically I am hoping there is a way that if he wants to stay down there indefinitely that he can. Let me know your thoughts and if someone has contact with him how he would like this done...he should try to see sean every day if he can to get that relationship even stronger than it already is.

 
Ok - My thoughts exactly!
 
How can we help David Everyday Until Sean Is Home? I CANNOT IMAGINE NOT BEING THERE WITH MY SON UNTIL THIS IS OVER!

There HAVE to be contacts to help him - ANYONE?!
Title: Re: Coverage of Supreme Court hearing-DON'T POST UNLESS YOU ARE WATCHING THE HEA
Post by: LAB on June 10, 2009, 11:26:12 PM
Quote from: Chuckles;31784
If anyone wants to make such an offer they can contact the correct people via the email address on the main contact page for the site; it will quickly be sent to the right people.

Ok, I am praying that those that can help David will step up to the plate and help him!!
Title: Re: Coverage of Supreme Court hearing-DON'T POST UNLESS YOU ARE WATCHING THE HEA
Post by: Lexi on June 10, 2009, 11:30:45 PM
Quote from: Sashia;31614
I don't think after this is over they have to worry much about court, Superior or otherwise. I bet the next case they get is where someone's dog wandered into the neighbors yard and they kept him. JP will argue he's "settled" there and insist they get the dog's testimony on camera, that he wants to stay there.:D

You may be right even though my post ended up being a little garbled. :)
 
Sashia, are you Brazilian (if you don't mind me asking)?
Title: Re: Coverage of Supreme Court hearing-DON'T POST UNLESS YOU ARE WATCHING THE HEA
Post by: ekc on June 10, 2009, 11:32:10 PM
who out there has contact with him to get this taken care of?  Also, I know a lot of people out there have frequent flier miles.  I have some thru united.  I will gladly donate them to David to fly down there.  I just need an account number to do so so whoever is in contact with him, let me know and I can give you those!!!  those of you who can do so, this is a small sacrifice!!!
Title: Re: Coverage of Supreme Court hearing-DON'T POST UNLESS YOU ARE WATCHING THE HEA
Post by: ekc on June 10, 2009, 11:35:18 PM
and anyone who lives in Brazil...if you have a place David can stay at so he can see Sean in private to for overnight visits that would be awesome!  Like a rental home or something.  Find those who coordinate that....he needs to be able to stay down there and see Sean EVERY DAY!!!  He has the legal right to do so!!  So lets help him as much as possible!!!!  let him know he is welcome to see his son as much as he can....it is a 13 hr flight but if I had to keep my day job and fly down every weekend I sure would!  We can get him there....this will only help his legal cause too by getting them even closer.
Title: Re: Coverage of Supreme Court hearing-DON'T POST UNLESS YOU ARE WATCHING THE HEA
Post by: noah3698 on June 10, 2009, 11:35:56 PM
Quote from: sharynf;31676
May I put this into perspective based on our US court system (Andre or Roger correct me where I stray).
 
David was granted custody of Sean by a New Jersey state court, because custody is a family law issue generally governed by the state where the child resides. I say "generally" because there can be cases of custody that infringe on US Constitutional issues (e.g., the old Love case where the father was given custody of the daughter because the mother had remarried into a mixed-race marriage; found to be unconstitutional eight years later by the US Supreme court!)

David sought the return of Sean from a federal Brazilian court under the Hague Convention. In the meantime, Bruna and company sought custody of Sean in a state Brazilian court based in family law. The Brazilian state court granted Bruna custody even though it did not have jurisdiction to do so.
 
In February, the federal Brazilian court determined that the issue was a federal issue (not a state court issue) and Judge Pinto heard the matter. This would be equivalent to an US district court hearing, which is a trial court that only hears federal matters.
 
A trial court is a finder of "facts". In the US, once an US district court makes a decision (i.e., if finds the facts and applies the facts to the law), the matter can be appealed to an US Circuit Court (e.g., the US Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit). This sounds like the equivalent to Brazil's TRF where LeS has already filed their appeal.
 
In the US, a right to appeal a final decision from an US district court is automatic and an US Circuit Court has no grounds to deny a properly filed appeal, unlike the US Supreme Court that can unilaterally decided not to hear an appeal. An US Circuit Court can only hear matters regarding procedure; it cannot find new facts! An example would be that the wrong application of law was applied, inadmissable evidence was given, the jury instructions were wrong, etc. From the postings, it sounds like the same would be true of Brazil's TRF, which is important because Brazil's STF has made statements that returning a child under the Hague is procedurally proper.
 
Once an US Circuit Court has made a decision on whether the procedure was proper, a party could appeal to the US Supreme Court (sounds like Brazil's STF). The US Supreme Court can only hear constitutional matters and it can simply refuse to hear an appeal (thus the decision of the US Circuit Court is the final word).
 
If LeS tried the same tactics here, he would be appealing an US district court decision straight to the US Supreme Court (that would have rejected it outright!), trying to bypass the US Circuit Courts. If in the US, LeS would have to have filed an emergency stay of the US district court's decision pending appeal with an US Circuit Court.
 
I find it interesting that Brazil's TRF did not accept LeS' appeal until Wednesday night, which would have been after Sean had been handed over to the US Embassy had the STF not granted the appeal. It looks like they were playing it safe to not be in the spot light. By waiting until Wednesday, the TRF had the umbrella of the STF's stay and let the STF take the heat for any delay in Sean's return. If the STF had denied LeS' appeal, Sean would have been long gone by the time the TRF made a decision.

Thank you very much Sharyn.  This was very helpful to me. Do you know if the TRF can only decide matters regarding procedure like the US Circuit Courts?
 
We all know that LES's appeal is going to be very heavy on "Sean's wishes to remain in Brazil" and I am hoping that Judge Pinto has covered that issue very extensively in his ruling so that the appeal will be denied.
Title: Re: Coverage of Supreme Court hearing-DON'T POST UNLESS YOU ARE WATCHING THE HEA
Post by: Irish17 on June 10, 2009, 11:48:57 PM
Ok, first. To all the people who are reaching out to David to try to help him with his flights and a place to stay in Brazil; God Bless You!!! What a fantastic and generous offer. I can not speak nor do I want to speak for David, yet as one supporter to another; THANK YOU.  I am sure that this will make a difference if David accepts the offers.  
 
Another point about today.  Somewhere in the comments there was a post about what David said after the court proceedings.  He said that now the emotional damage, the psychology issues of Sean due to how he has been treated by the other is out in the open; every one knows.  He gave me the impression that he was quite happy about that and in truth I can not blame him.  Now the other courts, the other judges will have some idea of what is going on with Sean himself besides what the three independant professionals said in their reports to the Honorable Judge Pinto.    
 
With all of that said though, we must continue to work, fight and campaign for Sean and the kids stuck in Brazil.  Until Sean is on US soil permanently with David, there can not be any let up. We must continue to put pressue on the White House, the State Department and any & all Brazilian officials; yes even President Lula.  This fight to bring Sean home has come so far in the past months that we can not stop now. We must continue what we have done so well in the past.  Lets finsih the job now and bring Sean and the other children home from Brazil.
Title: Re: Coverage of Supreme Court hearing-DON'T POST UNLESS YOU ARE WATCHING THE HEA
Post by: vivienne on June 10, 2009, 11:53:42 PM
Quote
I posted something similar earlier but I want to post it again. If my son were in Brazil, 13 hrs away by plane, I would want to stay regardless of business dealings here. I was wondering if anyone had any ways to get him free or inexpensive lodging while there so he can stay and visit sean whenever he needed to? Also, if anyone is an airline employee and can possibly get him some less expensive or comped flights....I do not want to try to get ahold of him but was wondering if someone has contact with him so that we can coordinate this for him. I would not want to work during something like this so I am even wondering if someone could have a job for him when this is over as well? Basically I am hoping there is a way that if he wants to stay down there indefinitely that he can. Let me know your thoughts and if someone has contact with him how he would like this done...he should try to see sean every day if he can to get that relationship even stronger than it already is.

Quote from: Chuckles;31784
If anyone wants to make such an offer they can contact the correct people via the email address on the main contact page for the site; it will quickly be sent to the right people.

Bump.

I agree with you, ekc, that this type of help would be wonderful.
Title: Re: Coverage of Supreme Court hearing-DON'T POST UNLESS YOU ARE WATCHING THE HEA
Post by: noah3698 on June 11, 2009, 12:02:05 AM
Quote from: ekc;31778
I posted something similar earlier but I want to post it again. If my son were in Brazil, 13 hrs away by plane, I would want to stay regardless of business dealings here. I was wondering if anyone had any ways to get him free or inexpensive lodging while there so he can stay and visit sean whenever he needed to? Also, if anyone is an airline employee and can possibly get him some less expensive or comped flights....I do not want to try to get ahold of him but was wondering if someone has contact with him so that we can coordinate this for him. I would not want to work during something like this so I am even wondering if someone could have a job for him when this is over as well? Basically I am hoping there is a way that if he wants to stay down there indefinitely that he can. Let me know your thoughts and if someone has contact with him how he would like this done...he should try to see sean every day if he can to get that relationship even stronger than it already is.

Davis has to pay his mortgage every month to ensure he has a house to bring Sean home to and I am sure he has surmounted a lot of debt while fighting for his son. He is the Captian of a fishing boat and makes money by taking customers out on fishing expeditions. To say he should remain in Brazil while all this is going on is probably not reasonable.
 
Edited to add that I think that ekc is being very thoughtful and I agree that a place for David to stay, free of charge, while he is in Brazil would be great.  Thanks for your efforts!
 
 
 
I believe there is a donate button on this website somewhere. I think a monetary donation is probably the best way to help David at this point.
Title: Re: Coverage of Supreme Court hearing-DON'T POST UNLESS YOU ARE WATCHING THE HEA
Post by: Teena on June 11, 2009, 12:08:20 AM
Quote from: Sashia;31614
I don't think after this is over they have to worry much about court, Superior or otherwise. I bet the next case they get is where someone's dog wandered into the neighbors yard and they kept him. JP will argue he's "settled" there and insist they get the dog's testimony on camera, that he wants to stay there.:D
Sashia....your posts crack me up every time! You should consider stand up comedy!:D
Title: Re: Coverage of Supreme Court hearing-DON'T POST UNLESS YOU ARE WATCHING THE HEA
Post by: noah3698 on June 11, 2009, 12:10:43 AM
The following is from a link I found on facebook http://www.estadao.com.br/noticias/cidades,supremo-comeca-sessao-que-analisa-caso-do-menino-sean,385470,0.htm
 
I translated through google the last paragraph, which states.....
 
The TRF also determined that the transition process started in Brazil's maternal family for the father. Ricardo Zamariolla said the transition has yet to be discussed with the father of the boy who, due to professional commitments in the United States can not remain in Brazil for a long period.
 

Obviously, something is being lost in the traslation, which is why this is very confusing. Can anyone help with this?
Title: Re: Coverage of Supreme Court hearing-DON'T POST UNLESS YOU ARE WATCHING THE HEA
Post by: André Felipe on June 11, 2009, 12:29:09 AM
Quote from: noah3698;31818
The following is from a link I found on facebook http://www.estadao.com.br/noticias/cidades,supremo-comeca-sessao-que-analisa-caso-do-menino-sean,385470,0.htm
 
I translated through google the last paragraph, which states.....
 
The TRF also determined that the transition process started in Brazil's maternal family for the father. Ricardo Zamariolla said the transition has yet to be discussed with the father of the boy who, due to professional commitments in the United States can not remain in Brazil for a long period.
 
 
Obviously, something is being lost in the traslation, which is why this is very confusing. Can anyone help with this?

I think the translation is correct.
It says there is an order from TRF determining the transition period starts in Brasil.
That´s strange to me...this should be discussed after the judgement (of the TRF), and not now...I wish to know more details about this appeal...
Title: Re: Coverage of Supreme Court hearing-DON'T POST UNLESS YOU ARE WATCHING THE HEA
Post by: Chicco on June 11, 2009, 12:32:10 AM
If we could get access to the video of today session so you can add it to the media and documents file of the site, it would be great. We could put subtitles in English and split the video in smaller ones. AGU, David´s lawyer, Ellen Gracie, the final result of 11x0 or maybe the JN link as it is a good recap of the daily event. We could even have  Toste so no one call BSH unfair, after all once you hear it all one just ignores the guy..
 
Everyone acessing the site would have access to the information and understand things a little better... Just a thought...
Title: Re: Coverage of Supreme Court hearing-DON'T POST UNLESS YOU ARE WATCHING THE HEA
Post by: Motherof2 on June 11, 2009, 12:38:11 AM
Also under David's picture :
" Now , the decision will have to go back to the TRF in Rio; the kid CAN go live with his father.

Agora, decisão deve voltar para julgamento no Tribunal Regional Federal do Rio; garoto pode ir viver com o pai
Title: Re: Coverage of Supreme Court hearing-DON'T POST UNLESS YOU ARE WATCHING THE HEA
Post by: jjsaunt on June 11, 2009, 01:09:30 AM
Quote from: André Felipe;31764

It´s about two proceedings: David x Bruna and now David x JPLS.
 
David x Bruna took too long, initiated in the middle of 2004 and ended in the beggining of 2008, january I think.
 
David x JPLS started on october 2008, I think. And only on February 2009 Judge Pinto could actually work with no disturb from State Justice.

According to what I read, David vs Bruna ended with her death.  He had lost the original case ("it's been to LOOONNNG") in late 2005/early 2006 and the appeal in 2007.  He was still waiting on the Supreme Court when she died in August 2008.  That was off a Brazilian legal website back in October 2008.
Title: Re: Coverage of Supreme Court hearing-DON'T POST UNLESS YOU ARE WATCHING THE HEA
Post by: sue on June 11, 2009, 01:12:38 AM
What happened today?  I've been gone all day and can't really tell by what is going on here.  I see that the PP lost.  But does David get to see Sean everyday away from those people?
Title: Re: Coverage of Supreme Court hearing-DON'T POST UNLESS YOU ARE WATCHING THE HEA
Post by: carina on June 11, 2009, 01:16:44 AM
So Roger and/or Andre,
What do you thing the outcome of this will be?
Do you thing this next move will be it or the dark side will be allowed more appeals?
Are we talking about weeks, months...?:nixweiss:
Title: Re: Coverage of Supreme Court hearing-DON'T POST UNLESS YOU ARE WATCHING THE HEA
Post by: pedi on June 11, 2009, 01:18:34 AM
Quote from: ekc;31780
and just another word....like that case where that journalist was held then suddenly let go last month, I think it was in Iran, notice no one  heard rumblings that it was going to happen.  It just did. There are politicians and leaders out there behind the scenes trying to make this all happen.  I am sure they are all in contact.  Someday we just might get word that Sean is coming home out of the blue.  At first I thought Obama or Hillary had no "cajones" to get the job done, but then I realize that I would not know about it anyway if it were being discussed.  It happens behind the scenes. But God will let it happen.  And the homecoming will be better than anything anyone could ever imagine.  And after it happens, I do not want to hear David or seans name every again....because that means they are happy and living the lives they deserve to live.



That's exactly what I think will happen and I have a hunch that it won't be months but rather weeks if not days.

If I think realistically about the last 5 years, what has happened in the Goldman case in terms of the legal battle in Brazil and what still could happen in the future (one appeal after another), I don't really see an end.

It seems to me as there are endless opportunities to delay the return of Sean. A transition period??? I don't know what that could look like. How could be assured that the boy won't be kidnapped again during those visitations by the silva family even on US soil?

This entire court ruling theater is just a farce and I believe that behind the scenes, invisible to us, strings are being pulled right now by politicians and lawmakers to get that boy out of the country.

I don't expect to hear anything serious about Sean's departure before he is actually back in the US already. And I would not be surprised if even David would learn about it last minute.

But I also think that this case has a greater purpose and all this waiting and all the ups and downs (well more downs than anything) was not in vein, so many parents are still waiting for the return of their children and for them this battle is fought as well.

I have to say that whenever I think of David I feel like he was 'god sent'. I wonder how many people would have made it through this loooooonng nightmare so far with such dignity, integrity, patience and always putting his son first WITHOUT ever loosing focus because of anger, disappointment and always playing by the rules. It takes a very special person to do that.

In the end it will all be good.

My thoughts go out to them both and I try very hard to send positive energy their way and not to loose focus by getting too worked up about the set backs and inhumane tactics by the silva family.
Title: Re: Coverage of Supreme Court hearing-DON'T POST UNLESS YOU ARE WATCHING THE HEA
Post by: kathne on June 11, 2009, 02:07:09 AM
i followed this up to page 17 real-time as it was happening, and read the rest of it now.  it is an unbelievable, incredible read.  
 
the brazilian courts and the american government should be stronger against this tiny tiny family.  you'd think this brazilian kidnapping family was an ARMY, based on the power they (seem to) wield.  but they are just a family doing bad, off the path of what the spirit world would want for them, just doing bad, running amuck, going to cocktail parties, hurting people.  
 
i read all 46 pages of this thread and thought, my god, is this the world our children will inherit?  this complexity and confusion and unethical maneuvering to keep a dad and son apart?
 
today is a victory, moving in the right direction, but the bigger picture of all of this is pure madness.  i'm glad that david has the heart and stamina to see this through to the end, where he and his son can be back together in their home in new jersey.  but what sort of corrupt and convoluted system requires this sort of larger-than-life stamina for justice to find its breath?
Title: Re: Coverage of Supreme Court hearing-DON'T POST UNLESS YOU ARE WATCHING THE HEA
Post by: SteveW on June 11, 2009, 06:27:53 AM
I don't see how any court can order a transition period to occur in Brazil without either the Brazilian government or Lins e Silvas HEAVILY compensating David for the cost including loss of business. No way they can impose that kind of burden on him. If they insist that this occurs even though it is in NO WAY part of the law (unles via a huge stretch based on "best interest of the child") then they - not David, not us, not volunteers - need to be responsible for it.
Title: Re: Coverage of Supreme Court hearing-DON'T POST UNLESS YOU ARE WATCHING THE HEA
Post by: mugsiejcu on June 11, 2009, 09:01:10 AM
Quote from: pedi;31840

A transition period??? I don't know what that could look like. How could be assured that the boy won't be kidnapped again during those visitations by the silva family even on US soil?
 

 
Hey, I hope this might make you feel a little better about this scenario... at the end of Judge Pinto's ruling, it states that Sean's passport will be in the possession of the US consulate during the entire transition period, and then will be in David's sole possession after that 30 day period. We'll see if that part of the ruling holds up in the appeals. I believe he also ruled something along the lines of Sean's passport being in the possession of the Brazilian consulate now and Sean not being allowed to leave Rio. Don't know if that is still in effect right now or not.
Title: Re: Coverage of Supreme Court hearing-DON'T POST UNLESS YOU ARE WATCHING THE HEA
Post by: SWEET72 on June 11, 2009, 09:10:22 AM
The fear is always that the Brazilian family could take Sean out of the US using his Brazilian passport.  The airlines and airport security would just think he is a tourist.  Many international child abductions happen this way.
Title: Re: Coverage of Supreme Court hearing-DON'T POST UNLESS YOU ARE WATCHING THE HEA
Post by: BrazilianForJustice on June 11, 2009, 09:12:45 AM
Quote from: SWEET72;31884
The fear is always that the Brazilian family could take Sean out of the US using his Brazilian passport.  The airlines and airport security would just think he is a tourist.  Many international child abductions happen this way.

And go live where? China?
Title: Re: Coverage of Supreme Court hearing-DON'T POST UNLESS YOU ARE WATCHING THE HEA
Post by: mugsiejcu on June 11, 2009, 09:18:28 AM
Quote from: SWEET72;31884
The fear is always that the Brazilian family could take Sean out of the US using his Brazilian passport. The airlines and airport security would just think he is a tourist. Many international child abductions happen this way.

 
They won't have access to his passport - it will be in the possession of the US consulate as soon as Sean gets to the US and then will be solely in David's possession following the transition period; that is, if everything goes according to Judge Pinto's ruling in the end.
Title: Re: Coverage of Supreme Court hearing-DON'T POST UNLESS YOU ARE WATCHING THE HEA
Post by: Jackie in Upstate NY on June 11, 2009, 09:21:00 AM
Quote from: mugsiejcu;31878
Hey, I hope this might make you feel a little better about this scenario... at the end of Judge Pinto's ruling, it states that Sean's passport will be in the possession of the US consulate during the entire transition period, and then will be in David's sole possession after that 30 day period. We'll see if that part of the ruling holds up in the appeals. I believe he also ruled something along the lines of Sean's passport being in the possession of the Brazilian consulate now and Sean not being allowed to leave Rio. Don't know if that is still in effect right now or not.
Thanks for that info... def nice to hear !
Title: Re: Coverage of Supreme Court hearing-DON'T POST UNLESS YOU ARE WATCHING THE HEA
Post by: BrazilianForJustice on June 11, 2009, 09:22:26 AM
Quote from: mugsiejcu;31889
They won't have access to his passport - it will be in the possession of the US consulate as soon as Sean gets to the US and then will be solely in David's possession following the transition period; that is, if everything goes according to Judge Pinto's ruling in the end.

Nothing prevents these people of having an extra, replacement passport stashed somewhere. But they could not take the boy to Brazil. It would have to be a non HC nation, wouldn't it?

But then, there would not be a taking parent involved, so it would be a pure case of child kidnapping and the Interpol would just inform the ports of entry about it. They would have no home, anywhere.
Title: Re: Coverage of Supreme Court hearing-DON'T POST UNLESS YOU ARE WATCHING THE HEA
Post by: kathy on June 11, 2009, 09:27:22 AM
Hopefully we do not have to even worry about them fleeing with Sean...I am pretty sure their being watched and i'm also sure David will be visiting Sean while hes there in Rio
Title: Re: Coverage of Supreme Court hearing-DON'T POST UNLESS YOU ARE WATCHING THE HEA
Post by: Wendy on June 11, 2009, 09:37:04 AM
K..I think you all are putting the cart before the horse here.  Lets get Sean back home with David before we start creating more things for him to worry about.  My take is that once David has Sean home and these people have shamed and humiliated their name and family they'll just fade off into the ether.  It's NOT about Sean! They dont' care about him.  They care about winning....and money...that's IT.
Title: Re: Coverage of Supreme Court hearing-DON'T POST UNLESS YOU ARE WATCHING THE HEA
Post by: BrazilianForJustice on June 11, 2009, 09:46:32 AM
Quote from: mugsiejcu;31889
They won't have access to his passport - it will be in the possession of the US consulate as soon as Sean gets to the US and then will be solely in David's possession following the transition period; that is, if everything goes according to Judge Pinto's ruling in the end.

Quote from: Wendy;31900
K..I think you all are putting the cart before the horse here.  Lets get Sean back home with David before we start creating more things for him to worry about.  My take is that once David has Sean home and these people have shamed and humiliated their name and family they'll just fade off into the ether.  It's NOT about Sean! They dont' care about him.  They care about winning....and money...that's IT.

That is right. Next someone will say that the baby sister will be the next one to try something. Precocious like Lisa from the Simpsons.
Title: Re: Coverage of Supreme Court hearing-DON'T POST UNLESS YOU ARE WATCHING THE HEA
Post by: todez on June 11, 2009, 11:08:00 AM
Quote from: mugsiejcu;31878
Sean's passport will be in the possession of the US consulate during the entire transition period,
 
They should also get the LeS passports IF they come to the U.S.   I believe the family might not go, knowing that they could be processed for kidnapping charges (and they should be) IMO.  Congressman Smith should also start a Congressional investigation into thier law practice ties in the U.S.
Title: Re: Coverage of Supreme Court hearing-DON'T POST UNLESS YOU ARE WATCHING THE HEA
Post by: joey2051 on June 11, 2009, 11:27:30 AM
The transition idea is stupid.  The weeks it takes to get a verdict are enough.  Same thing with how the stf minister granted them another week,  It took 6+ months to be ready for the descion but yet they needed another week!  This needs to stop now.
Title: Re: Coverage of Supreme Court hearing-DON'T POST UNLESS YOU ARE WATCHING THE HEA
Post by: jl2saint on June 11, 2009, 11:44:31 AM
Quote from: joey2051;31977
The transition idea is stupid. The weeks it takes to get a verdict are enough. Same thing with how the stf minister granted them another week, It took 6+ months to be ready for the descion but yet they needed another week! This needs to stop now.

The "transition period is designed to help SEAN! Not to make us feel better or anything else......As much as we want to say "it's been way too long" ( it has ), this is what psychologists recommend to help him adjust......

My worries are the following:

1) How will Grandma and JPLS be recieved in NJ? I wouldn't want Sean to see ANY anti-Brazilian sentiment or any type of protest or rude behavior.......So people had better not even think about it....

2) Will they even come? They might try to delay siting "fears" eventhough David has been dealing w/ threats for the last 5 yrs. They might just throw in the towel, say "oh well, we lost", and not cooperate.....

3) Will they be there helping Sean adjust or trying to sabotage his transition ( up to this point, they haven't done anything to help )?

4) Seans ability to understand. This is VERY HARD for him and won't be easy. There will be more bad days than good starting out......

Title: Re: Coverage of Supreme Court hearing-DON'T POST UNLESS YOU ARE WATCHING THE HEA
Post by: Wendy on June 11, 2009, 11:47:36 AM
I think children are extremely resilient...Sean will be just fine...IF we can get him away from these horrifying people!!!
Title: Re: Coverage of Supreme Court hearing-DON'T POST UNLESS YOU ARE WATCHING THE HEA
Post by: whartn on June 11, 2009, 11:53:33 AM
If David has to stay in Rio for a period of time(transition),the USG via the consulate should furnish David w/ an apt.I also think David could recieve a daily stipend.He could be Consular for Child Abductions in Br.A new post created by SOS.
I hope SOS Clinton,POTUS, and Lula are talking--This could be decided in a matter of days.
In the meantime I am making another donation via web site.I think this is a way BSH can do something for David.
Title: Re: Coverage of Supreme Court hearing-DON'T POST UNLESS YOU ARE WATCHING THE HEA
Post by: Bo1 on June 11, 2009, 12:14:10 PM
Quote from: jl2saint;31986

 
1) How will Grandma and JPLS be recieved in NJ?
 


With any luck quite courteously.....by the FBI.;)
Title: Re: Coverage of Supreme Court hearing-DON'T POST UNLESS YOU ARE WATCHING THE HEA
Post by: vivienne on June 11, 2009, 12:16:51 PM
Quote from: jl2saint;31986
The "transition period is designed to help SEAN! Not to make us feel better or anything else......As much as we want to say "it's been way too long" ( it has ), this is what psychologists recommend to help him adjust......
 
My worries are the following:
 
1) How will Grandma and JPLS be recieved in NJ? I wouldn't want Sean to see ANY anti-Brazilian sentiment or any type of protest or rude behavior.......So people had better not even think about it....
 
2) Will they even come? They might try to delay siting "fears" eventhough David has been dealing w/ threats for the last 5 yrs. They might just throw in the towel, say "oh well, we lost", and not cooperate.....
 
3) Will they be there helping Sean adjust or trying to sabotage his transition ( up to this point, they haven't done anything to help )?
 
4) Seans ability to understand. This is VERY HARD for him and won't be easy. There will be more bad days than good starting out......
 

I think those are all good concerns. Several people have said that Sean will need counseling when he returns home. I think both David and Sean could use some counseling together when they are reunited. Also, once they come home, even though it may be unavoidable, the less time spent in the media spotlight, the better. Sean will have to re-adapt to his home in NJ and he will be overstimulated as it is.

Things might be very awkward for awhile. I hope the Brazilian family does their part to nurture Sean and his Brazilian heritage, and I hope David is forgiving of them as well. Sean will have a much better time if both sides can come together to do what's best for him instead of their own self-interests.
Title: Re: Coverage of Supreme Court hearing-DON'T POST UNLESS YOU ARE WATCHING THE HEA
Post by: kathy on June 11, 2009, 12:25:03 PM
i HOPE FOR A VERY SMOOTH TRANSITION FOR SEAN AND HOPE THE BRAZILLIAN FAMILY LETS GO OF ALL THE BAD FEELINGS THEY BROUGHT FORTH..DAVID THERE IS NO QUESTION THAT DAVID HAS SEANS BEST INTREST.. THE QUESTION IS DO THE BRAZILLIAN FAMILY HAVE SEANS BEST INTREST AND SO FAR THEY HAVNT SHONE 1 OUNCE OF IT
Title: Re: Coverage of Supreme Court hearing-DON'T POST UNLESS YOU ARE WATCHING THE HEA
Post by: bev on June 11, 2009, 12:32:19 PM
And to that I would like to add that it would be helpful to Sean to have contact with other Brazilian/American families where he could interact with children that have the bicultural experiences he has to help him adapt to such a new environment.  That will probably come around, but certainly David and Sean have so much to work on, alone and slowly into a normal family setting again.
Title: Re: Coverage of Supreme Court hearing-DON'T POST UNLESS YOU ARE WATCHING THE HEA
Post by: vivienne on June 11, 2009, 12:38:11 PM
Quote from: bev;32013
And to that I would like to add that it would be helpful to Sean to have contact with other Brazilian/American families where he could interact with children that have the bicultural experiences he has to help him adapt to such a new environment.

I totally agree. Sean is a bilingual/bicultural kid and I hope that David is cognizant of that and supportive of him retaining his Brazilian heritage.
Title: Re: Coverage of Supreme Court hearing-DON'T POST UNLESS YOU ARE WATCHING THE HEA
Post by: forsean on June 11, 2009, 01:10:27 PM
Quote from: Bo1;32000
With any luck quite courteously.....by the FBI.;)

:clapping::clapping:
Title: Re: Coverage of Supreme Court hearing-DON'T POST UNLESS YOU ARE WATCHING THE HEA
Post by: KarmaGirl on June 11, 2009, 01:16:46 PM
I'm very sad today.  This Supreme Court denial doesn't do anything with regard to reinstating Judge Pinto's order.  In the US, the order would be in effect and Sean would be ordered to go with David immediately because the Supreme court denied hearing the case.

These delays are unreasonable, unjust and insane.

If you do protest, please make signs "Justice delayed is Justice denied!"  I think that needs to be the theme from here on forward.  The delay is the injustice, who cares about what court this case is in and who is winning, JPLS is always winning if Sean is away from David.  

I'm sick to my stomach worried for Sean.  I do not want David in Brazil more than he absolutely has to, and his having to fly down there repeatedly is NOT OK with me.  They are playing with him, as they have been for five years and this has to stop.

The transition period is all bogus.  Kids want to be with their parents.  Sean will smile, get on the plane and go have a good life with David.  Any unresolved feelings will be dealt with between Father and Son.  David can handle his own child, however he is being deprived of that opportunity and Sean is being brainwashed and nobody is ordering this boy home!  Sean has to actually GO with David, and NOW.

All this talk, no action.  This court, that court, independent judiciary my XXX.  Brazil is robbing a father of the God given right to raise his own child, and this boy is being emotionally abused at the hands of someone he is not even related to, and it has to stop!

It is insane!  I think we should focus on the DELAY that is the corrupt part, screw all the legal points.  No custody case, or Hague case should EVER take five years.  Now it sounds like JPLS can keep this in the courts for a few more years.  Sean will be too old then to adapt to a new life, and David will be successfully torn from Sean's life.

THIS HAS TO STOP NOW!

What in the world can we do more than what we have been?  I will listen to ANY IDEAS and if they are reasonable and respectful, I will follow suit.  I'll do anything!  IDEAS???

I've sent money, I've called, this info is on my facebook page, I've written, I've brainstormed here with you all, I've raised a stink about the Olympics and I've tried to remain hopeful.

This is too much for anybody to bear and I hurt so much for David and Sean.

IDEAS?  Who has some for us today?  Please don't say, "Wait . . . . "

Do I just need to PM Wendy again and cry?
Title: Re: Coverage of Supreme Court hearing-DON'T POST UNLESS YOU ARE WATCHING THE HEA
Post by: KarmaGirl on June 11, 2009, 01:28:41 PM
OK, so this is how divine intervention works!  I PM'd Wendy, was going to sign out and I had a thought.  Why don't those of us who cannot attend the NY rally, pay for those who can attend to go?  That is if the money is there.  Some of us have money we can pledge, some have time, some have both.  How about this idea?  

Signing off now, my sweet boy is 8 years old today.  I think I'm really feeling extra down today for David, but will just put that much extra love in to my own son and children on behalf of him.
Title: Re: Coverage of Supreme Court hearing-DON'T POST UNLESS YOU ARE WATCHING THE HEA
Post by: Dan_Plainview on June 11, 2009, 01:58:37 PM
Quote from: André Felipe;31825
I think the translation is correct.
It says there is an order from TRF determining the transition period starts in Brasil.
That´s strange to me...this should be discussed after the judgement (of the TRF), and not now...I wish to know more details about this appeal...

It is strange, but if it is true then doesn't it forbode of good things to come? If the transition is indicated and it takes place during the time the 2nd instance is considering Tostes appeal then it does not need to be indicated again in the 2nd Instance decision.
 
In other words, if it happens now it does not need to happen again in NJ. It can happen concurrently with the walking of the case through the courts. If it is true, I think it is good news of/ for things to come
Title: Re: Coverage of Supreme Court hearing-DON'T POST UNLESS YOU ARE WATCHING THE HEA
Post by: heatheram29 on June 11, 2009, 02:07:36 PM
Quote from: bev;32013
And to that I would like to add that it would be helpful to Sean to have contact with other Brazilian/American families where he could interact with children that have the bicultural experiences he has to help him adapt to such a new environment. That will probably come around, but certainly David and Sean have so much to work on, alone and slowly into a normal family setting again.

 
http://www.newjerseybrasil.com/
http://www.meetup.com/NJBrazilians/
http://www.brazilstation.com/
http://www.brazzilmag.com/
http://www.brazzilbrief.com/ motto: "Since 1989 trying to understand Brazil"  (hahaha love it!)
 
 
 
http://www.brazilcham.com/default.asp?id=317
The Brazilian American Chamber of Commerce is having an 'Invest in Brasil' conference in NYC on June 25th. May be an interesting place to call attention to the issue of child abduction.
*one of the members (coincidence?):
Albatroz Limo Tour Inc. (http://"http://www.brazilcham.com/default.asp?id=246&mid=6378)
Silvania Ribeiro

 
 
 
http://www.njyouthsoccer.com/
Title: Re: Coverage of Supreme Court hearing-DON'T POST UNLESS YOU ARE WATCHING THE HEA
Post by: Lexi on June 11, 2009, 02:16:19 PM
Quote from: KarmaGirl;32033
OK, so this is how divine intervention works! I PM'd Wendy, was going to sign out and I had a thought. Why don't those of us who cannot attend the NY rally, pay for those who can attend to go? That is if the money is there. Some of us have money we can pledge, some have time, some have both. How about this idea?
 
Signing off now, my sweet boy is 8 years old today. I think I'm really feeling extra down today for David, but will just put that much extra love in to my own son and children on behalf of him.

Hope your little boy has a great birthday!
 
I'm sure everyone here can relate to your frustration - the delays are extremely difficult and without a doubt, time is a most precious commodity. That said, the case and the campaign still have to be handled with some amount of finesse exactly because the stakes are so high.
 
I'm not out of ideas and I don't for a second believe BSH admin is either, but I personally like to get a good read on what's unfolding instead of reacting in a knee-jerk way (and I realize that's not what you're calling for). Just letting you know that there are still options, that's all.
Title: Re: Coverage of Supreme Court hearing-DON'T POST UNLESS YOU ARE WATCHING THE HEA
Post by: matheus on June 11, 2009, 02:28:52 PM
Quote
The fear is always that the Brazilian family could take Sean out of the US using his Brazilian passport. The airlines and airport security would just think he is a tourist. Many international child abductions happen this way.

This is no cause for worry.  The US will only recognize David as being Sean's father and from what I've heard, children cannot board an international flight without authorization from the parent.  I'm pretty sure some random kidnapper, John Doe, cannot just walk up, snatch a kid, and board a flight to wherever.
Title: Re: Coverage of Supreme Court hearing-DON'T POST UNLESS YOU ARE WATCHING THE HEA
Post by: caique mateus on June 11, 2009, 02:31:24 PM
Quote from: heatheram29;32044
The Brazilian American Chamber of Commerce is having an 'Invest in Brasil' conference in NYC on June 25th. May be an interesting place to call attention to the issue of child abduction.
*one of the members (coincidence?):
Albatroz Limo Tour Inc. (http://www.brazilcham.com/default.asp?id=246&mid=6378)
Silvania Ribeiro

 
http://www.njyouthsoccer.com/

I don't think it's gradma Silvana (not Silvânia) Ribeiro.
 
I check the website of this Company and it says:
 
A Albatroz LimoTour foi criada há 9 anos pela brasileira Silvânia Ribeiro para ser reconhecida no mercado por possuir serviços completamente diferenciados dos que então existiam em Nova York. Esse foi o ojetivo desta empresária de Belo Horizonte e que hoje é referência no Brasil e em NY no ramo de transfer e turismo.
 
Albatroz LimoTour was created 9 years ago by the Brazilian Silvânia Ribeiro to be recognized in the market for offering completly differenciated services compared to the ones existing do far in New York. This was the objective of this businesswoman from Belo Horizonte that today is a reference in Brazil and in NY in the branch of transfer and tourism.
 
Forgive me for the poor translation, but maybe you can get the idea.
 
Ribeiro is as very common surname in Brazil. Silvana is also a popular first name, as well as some variations, like Silvânia. I'm sure there are plenty of Silvana Ribeiro's around. Maybe someone in NY can confirm that, but I don't think it's grandma Silvana Ribeiro.
Title: Re: Coverage of Supreme Court hearing-DON'T POST UNLESS YOU ARE WATCHING THE HEA
Post by: nina on June 11, 2009, 02:33:57 PM
Hi KarmaGirl,

I am not sure if you are in Brazil or in US but I was thinking that maybe doing a rally in Brazil (more specifically Rio) could bring more pressure. From what I have been reading in the news/blogs in Brazil, and all the comments people (common people!) post, it seems that many Brazilians are with David.

I am in UK, but maybe we can start promoting a rally (for the 16th? the same day as the NY one? maybe?) through BSH, Facebook and certainly Orkut we can expect many people to show up...

Any ideas? What are the thoughts of those living in Br? Chicco, Andre, Roger...? Would it be good?
Title: Re: Coverage of Supreme Court hearing-DON'T POST UNLESS YOU ARE WATCHING THE HEA
Post by: Lexi on June 11, 2009, 02:41:36 PM
Roger,
I've been thinking about something you said a while back, that Brazilians tend to like enjoying themselves too much to care about oversight - that it wouldn't be a popular undertaking (something to that effect).
 
From what we've seen in this case, that seems to be a big part of the problem. It's not that the country doesn't have sophisticated laws or highly competent judges and lawyers. The problem is the rogue judges and lawyers who can easily abuse the system with impunity. There isn't much accountability, even from the media. This isn't some epiphany on my part - I'm certain it's been said many times before. It's just that it leaves me thinking changing things will be quite challenging, especially in the short term.
 
Anyway, you and Andre are part of the group of "young turk" lawyers who will ultimately make a difference. Judge Nogueira too - I have no idea if he's chronologically young but he's clearly progressive. I didn't include you guys in the list yesterday because the point was about the lawyers and judges directly involved in the case vs. the LeS and Tostes.
Title: Re: Coverage of Supreme Court hearing-DON'T POST UNLESS YOU ARE WATCHING THE HEA
Post by: Herb Wife on June 11, 2009, 03:31:05 PM
Is there going to be a rally in NY the 16th? I seem to have missed whether or not that was confirmed. I would love to go if this is still on.
 
My calls to white house were made...what else can I do?   : )
Title: Re: Coverage of Supreme Court hearing-DON'T POST UNLESS YOU ARE WATCHING THE HEA
Post by: Grace on June 11, 2009, 03:52:57 PM
"Ribeiro is as very common surname in Brazil. Silvana is also a popular first name, as well as some variations, like Silvânia. I'm sure there are plenty of Silvana Ribeiro's around. Maybe someone in NY can confirm that, but I don't think it's grandma Silvana Ribeiro.[/quote]"
 
Caique, you are right. This is not Sean's grandmother, definetely.
Title: Re: Coverage of Supreme Court hearing-DON'T POST UNLESS YOU ARE WATCHING THE HEA
Post by: carina on June 11, 2009, 03:54:49 PM
Quote from: Bo1;32000
With any luck quite courteously.....by the FBI.;)
:yeahthat::yeahthat::yeahthat:
Title: Re: Coverage of Supreme Court hearing-DON'T POST UNLESS YOU ARE WATCHING THE HEA
Post by: joey2051 on June 11, 2009, 03:59:27 PM
http://www.martindale.com/Tostes-e-Associados-Advogados/law-firm-950074.htm                                                                     Heres an article that says Tostes main partner in his law firm used to be the President of the Supreme court of the state of Rio de Janiero.  No wonder why they wanted it in State justice!!!   You can just imagine how connected the LeS family is in the state courts as well....
Title: Re: Coverage of Supreme Court hearing-DON'T POST UNLESS YOU ARE WATCHING THE HEA
Post by: Grace on June 11, 2009, 03:59:41 PM
Quote from: vivienne;32014
I totally agree. Sean is a bilingual/bicultural kid and I hope that David is cognizant of that and supportive of him retaining his Brazilian heritage.

I think that especially in the beginning, it would be helpful if David could find some Brazilians in his area or go to some Brazilian events for Sean's sake. Also get some Brazilian products like Guarana, pao de queijo e bombom Sonho de Valsa in South American markets. New York City has Little Brazil. That's something Sean would appreciate.
 
If David ever wants to show Sean the capital of his country for a few days, he's welcome in my home. My daughter is 18 and visits from College some weekends and speaks fluent Portuguese. Kids love her (she has always worked with kids during her summers and she is studying Child Psychology at the Univ. of MD).
Title: Re: Coverage of Supreme Court hearing-DON'T POST UNLESS YOU ARE WATCHING THE HEA
Post by: joey2051 on June 11, 2009, 04:03:49 PM
BTW according to tostes website he was the director of the American chamber of commerce from 1990 to 1998!!
Title: Re: Coverage of Supreme Court hearing-DON'T POST UNLESS YOU ARE WATCHING THE HEA
Post by: Grace on June 11, 2009, 04:04:04 PM
Quote from: joey2051;32087
http://www.martindale.com/Tostes-e-Associados-Advogados/law-firm-950074.htm Heres an article that says Tostes main partner in his law firm used to be the President of the Supreme court of the state of Rio de Janiero. No wonder why they wanted it in State justice!!! You can just imagine how connected the LeS family is in the state courts as well....

The more established lawyers all know each other and also the Judges. It's a little boy's club.
 
However, when the public opinion becomes MAJORLY against something, even old allegiances start to crumble when people decide it is better to save their own a$$es.
Title: Re: Coverage of Supreme Court hearing-DON'T POST UNLESS YOU ARE WATCHING THE HEA
Post by: sue on June 11, 2009, 04:06:45 PM
Grace, what's the word on the blogs today?  What has Elizabeth and Nick got to say today?
Title: Re: Coverage of Supreme Court hearing-DON'T POST UNLESS YOU ARE WATCHING THE HEA
Post by: Grace on June 11, 2009, 04:09:58 PM
Gail, I have been a coward today, maybe because of yesterday's stress, but I haven't checked in there yet. EV, Naira do Carmo and NickBerger make me want to become Freddy Krueger :), they really raise my blood pressure. Wish you guys would come there more often. Liesl just sent me a PM saying EV is raising hell there, I guess I gotta go and face the madness...
Title: Re: Coverage of Supreme Court hearing-DON'T POST UNLESS YOU ARE WATCHING THE HEA
Post by: Grace on June 11, 2009, 04:11:08 PM
Liesl, let's tell everyone here what the madwoman is saying today. Sometimes she shoots herself on the foot by giving us important information.
Title: Re: Coverage of Supreme Court hearing-DON'T POST UNLESS YOU ARE WATCHING THE HEA
Post by: Grace on June 11, 2009, 04:12:08 PM
On a lighter note, in many of these TV shows about David's case they show us at the rally in front of the White House. They have showed my back a few times. Makes us extra proud :)
Title: Re: Coverage of Supreme Court hearing-DON'T POST UNLESS YOU ARE WATCHING THE HEA
Post by: sue on June 11, 2009, 04:12:21 PM
Quote from: Grace;32094
Gail, I have been a coward today, maybe because of yesterday's stress, but I haven't checked in there yet. EV, Naira do Carmo and NickBerger make me want to become Freddy Krueger :), they really raise my blood pressure. Wish you guys would come there more often. Liesl just sent me a PM saying EV is raising hell there, I guess I gotta go and face the madness...
Go get em :)  It's too hard for me because the screen won't open up all the way so I can't cut and paste.  So it takes way too long and I can't understand any of it.  When you guys are there you answer back in english to me, oh and Nick does too. LOL  Usually calling me some childish name.
Title: Re: Coverage of Supreme Court hearing-DON'T POST UNLESS YOU ARE WATCHING THE HEA
Post by: jthomas48 on June 11, 2009, 04:20:45 PM
What blogs are these? I would love to check them out!
Title: Re: Coverage of Supreme Court hearing-DON'T POST UNLESS YOU ARE WATCHING THE HEA
Post by: Ceilli on June 11, 2009, 04:41:10 PM
Quote from: jthomas48;32106
What blogs are these? I would love to check them out!

Here's one: http://oglobo.globo.com/blogs/brasilcomz/
Title: Re: Coverage of Supreme Court hearing-DON'T POST UNLESS YOU ARE WATCHING THE HEA
Post by: todez on June 11, 2009, 04:46:04 PM
Quote from: jthomas48;32106
What blogs are these? I would love to check them out!

 
Here you go:
 
http://oglobo.globo.com/blogs/brasilcomz/default.asp
Title: Re: Coverage of Supreme Court hearing-DON'T POST UNLESS YOU ARE WATCHING THE HEA
Post by: ATAYLOR on June 11, 2009, 04:46:43 PM
Can Anyone confirm that the courts are closed for a Holiday there? If so, is this until Monday?
Title: Re: Coverage of Supreme Court hearing-DON'T POST UNLESS YOU ARE WATCHING THE HEA
Post by: Grace on June 11, 2009, 05:27:18 PM
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ellen_Gracie_Northfleet
 
 
Did you know that Ellen Gracie almost became a substitute president when Lula was abroad? She would make a great first female president in Brazil.
 
When can our American BSH fellows be able to read hers, Toffoli's and Zamariola's excellent speeches in English? Anyone know?
Title: Re: Coverage of Supreme Court hearing-DON'T POST UNLESS YOU ARE WATCHING THE HEA
Post by: BrazilianForJustice on June 11, 2009, 05:32:21 PM
Quote from: ATAYLOR;32128
Can Anyone confirm that the courts are closed for a Holiday there? If so, is this until Monday?

Yes. Corpus Christie. They are only back on Monday.

P.S. Is there a list of blogs here that we can point newcomers to, in case they want to look at external sources?  Thanks.
Title: Re: Coverage of Supreme Court hearing-DON'T POST UNLESS YOU ARE WATCHING THE HEA
Post by: BrazilianForJustice on June 11, 2009, 05:41:25 PM
Quote from: jthomas48;32106
What blogs are these? I would love to check them out!

You can also check the headlines at the O Globo newspaper from Rio:

http://translate.google.com/translate?js=n&prev=_t&hl=en&ie=UTF-8&u=http%3A%2F%2Fbusca2.globo.com%2FBusca%2Foglobo%2F%3Fquery%3Dsean%2Bgoldman%26dataA%3Ddd%252Fmm%252Faaaa%26dataB%3Ddd%252Fmm%252Faaaa%26ordenacao%3Ddescending%26offset%3D1%26xargs%3D%26formato%3D%26requisitor%3Doglobo%26aba%3Dtodos%26filtro%3D%26on%3Dfalso%26formatos%3D140%252C140%252C0%252C0%252C0%252C0%252C0%252C0%252C0%252C0%252C0&sl=pt&tl=en&history_state0=
Title: Re: Coverage of Supreme Court hearing-DON'T POST UNLESS YOU ARE WATCHING THE HEA
Post by: noah3698 on June 11, 2009, 05:47:06 PM
Quote from: Grace;32094
Gail, I have been a coward today, maybe because of yesterday's stress, but I haven't checked in there yet. EV, Naira do Carmo and NickBerger make me want to become Freddy Krueger :), they really raise my blood pressure. Wish you guys would come there more often. Liesl just sent me a PM saying EV is raising hell there, I guess I gotta go and face the madness...

Grace,  you are too funny!!  Make you want to become Freddy Krueger!!  OMG that was funny...
Title: Re: Coverage of Supreme Court hearing-DON'T POST UNLESS YOU ARE WATCHING THE HEA
Post by: Grace on June 11, 2009, 06:35:38 PM
Quote from: noah3698;32158
Grace,  you are too funny!!  Make you want to become Freddy Krueger!!  OMG that was funny...


Guess what? Others have noticed too. Elizabeth is a lot mellower today, I wonder why...
Title: Re: Coverage of Supreme Court hearing-DON'T POST UNLESS YOU ARE WATCHING THE HEA
Post by: FC_Florida on June 11, 2009, 07:56:48 PM
Quote from: Grace;32167
Guess what? Others have noticed too. Elizabeth is a lot mellower today, I wonder why...

Elisabeth was spewing her venon yesterday in the comments section in the latest O GLobo newspaper article about the STF hearing...as well as her known (and new) "aliases"...Liesa, Cangaceira 13, Sudoeste, Naira do Carmo, Angel Luna, Paulo Borges, etc...Other people, probably BSH members and I put up a good fight. She's always using the same old speech...she doesn't even bother to alter her comments. She copy & paste from Eduardo's blog to the O Globo and vice-versa. I don't know why I keep wasting my time with them but I can't help it. I enjoy seeing her get choked up in her own venon...
Title: Re: Coverage of Supreme Court hearing-DON'T POST UNLESS YOU ARE WATCHING THE HEA
Post by: Luiza on June 11, 2009, 08:14:13 PM
Quote from: Grace;32088
I think that especially in the beginning, it would be helpful if David could find some Brazilians in his area or go to some Brazilian events for Sean's sake. Also get some Brazilian products like Guarana, pao de queijo e bombom Sonho de Valsa in South American markets. New York City has Little Brazil. That's something Sean would appreciate.
 
If David ever wants to show Sean the capital of his country for a few days, he's welcome in my home. My daughter is 18 and visits from College some weekends and speaks fluent Portuguese. Kids love her (she has always worked with kids during her summers and she is studying Child Psychology at the Univ. of MD).

Grace, that is a wonderfully gracious offer.  That would be great.
Title: Re: Coverage of Supreme Court hearing-DON'T POST UNLESS YOU ARE WATCHING THE HEA
Post by: Ria on June 11, 2009, 08:33:27 PM
Hi, I am fairly new here.  I live in NJ, and David can take Sean to the Ironbound section of Newark, NJ which is a big Brazilian community with lots of restaurants & stores.
Title: Re: Coverage of Supreme Court hearing-DON'T POST UNLESS YOU ARE WATCHING THE HEA
Post by: lisacallenwood on June 11, 2009, 08:37:23 PM
Quote from: Ria;32223
Hi, I am fairly new here. I live in NJ, and David can take Sean to the Ironbound section of Newark, NJ which is a big Brazilian community with lots of restaurants & stores.

Hey Ria!!
 
Welcome!! I LOVE the Ironbound. GREAT Portuguese restaurants in that area. One of the things I miss most about northern NJ!!
Title: Re: Coverage of Supreme Court hearing-DON'T POST UNLESS YOU ARE WATCHING THE HEA
Post by: FC_Florida on June 11, 2009, 08:41:21 PM
There's a huge Portuguese and Brazilian communities in and around Newark, NJ. It's not that far from David's town.
 
When I lived In NYC, even though I could get Brazilian food on 46th St (Little Brazil), I would drive with my husband (when we still had a car, we were crazy) to Ferry St. Or shopping in the Seabra Supermarket. I would buy a lot of that stuff that Grace mentioned and some more like Catupiry cheese, requeijão, codfish croquettes (bolinho de bacalhau. Ai!).
 
South Florida, most precisely Miami Beach where I live, it's like Rio (or Cuba, Venezuela...whole Latin America and the Caribbean are represented here).There are more churrascarias here than in Rio, if you compare per square meters...I even think our beaches here are better than Rio. It might not be the same landscape, but the waters are very clean, a beautiful turquoise...There are Brazilians everywhere....and their culture follows. The music, food, celebrations like Carnaval, Brazilian Independence Day are all celebrated around the country by the communities.
Title: Re: Coverage of Supreme Court hearing-DON'T POST UNLESS YOU ARE WATCHING THE HEA
Post by: Lexi on June 11, 2009, 08:56:46 PM
I am really looking forward to reading Toffoli's, Zamariola's and the Judges comments. I think I'd actually like to listen to the audio at the same time just for effect - I can understand words here and there but not enough to read all of the articles etc. It is great that Sean is bilingual and perhaps he understands/speaks some Italian too though it should never have come about in this way.
 
I noticed that David said he had to talk to his lawyers after the session to find out what was said because it was in Portuguese. I wonder if an electronic translator would come in useful for him.
Title: Re: Coverage of Supreme Court hearing-DON'T POST UNLESS YOU ARE WATCHING THE HEA
Post by: Kerry on June 11, 2009, 10:00:15 PM

My suggestion is that David learn a little Portuguese (if he doesn't know any yet), so he can charm Sean - talking to him in both languages.
And if David makes mistakes with the language, Sean can be the "teacher".

This transition lark is just that - a lark!
It's a way to prolong the agony of separation - separating father and son.

I am sure that David will allow Sean to talk to the Brazilian abductors on the 'phone anytime - hopefully monitoring the calls/conversations to make sure that nothing detrimental or poisonous is said to Sean.
And as long as Sean has access this way, I am pretty sure he will soon just meld into life here.
 
Kids are so adaptable - whatever culture they come from or language they speak.
America is an easy country to adapt to - believe me I know.
I have 3 boys who had to adapt to this very different culture, and they all thrived in a matter of a few months, and became "American".
(I can't say the same for this parent - me!)

All David has to do is sign Sean up to a soccer club in the winter, and give him access to all the sports he enjoys right now, and he will soon be in his element.
He will make so many friends this way.

And of course he has Grandma and Grandpa Goldman, his aunt, uncle and cousins who will all fill his life with unconditional love and understanding.

So Brazil - stop with the hold-up.
Stop with all the appeals.
Stop giving these family members more time to play with his mind.
Stop stopping the inevitable, and allow this American born son to come home where he belongs.