Your email address:


Powered by FeedBlitz

My Photo

Top 100 Family Law Blogs

All Top Family Law Blogs

Top Family Law Blogs

Justia Family Law Blawgs

VISIT MY WEBSITE

RESOURCES - SINGLE AND DIVORCING PARENTS

« When does a state have exclusive, continuing jurisdiction? | Main | How to choose a divorce or custody lawyer »

Comments

Dear Reader[s]:

In my opinion the news attacking Sean's non-biological father of had kidnapped Sean is wrong and incorrect under the law. Definition of child abuction is not the news are saying on this case. Based on facts of the case Sean's mother took him to Brazil for a vacation and his father agreed to his son traveling traveling with his mother to Brazil. I guess the news need to find out if in fact David did sign an authorization granting his wife permission to travel to Brazil [this declaration needs to be sealed by the Brazilian the Embassy]. If David and his wife did not do this, I take that they were not informed about international law as many other parents are not as well.

My second concern is about if David knew so much about the law in USA and in Brazil, why did he waited for the time be expired until took steps to remove his son from Brazil. He claims on the news that his wife called him from Brazil within a week or so her intentions of not returning back to the United States.

My third opinion is under the Brazilian government non-sense saying that the separation of Sean after lived with his non-biological father would be detrimental to Sean. That is the most outrageous defense of any government on issues of custody, and it happens in Brazil and the United States. These judges always come up with smart talks to inflict emotional feelings to parties involved in issues of custody and to the public, so non ones can agree with one thing, " A child is belong this his or her biological parent and no state has the right to remove that right. If a state did so it violated constitutional laws, and violations of constitutional laws are not permitted in the United States and is not permitted in Brazil, so what is granting the courts to violate these constitutional laws under child custody, is a question to bear in mind. In my opinion the courts are not concerned about the well being of anyone, the least of the well being of a child, rather the courts are interested in inserting an opinion and safeguard a law suit for violations of state breaking the law. Anyone wants to comment on my comment, feel free to do; I even give my email address: lenirrichardson2002@yahoo.com. Thank you.

Tom,

Tom, thank you for your comments, with which I heartily agree. In my review of the various comments floating around in cyberspace, I am appalled at the number of comments that pit Brazil against the USA or vice versa.

I've read Lins de Silva's March 2009 letter in which he continually referred to David Goldman in a most divisive and derisive manner as "the American." http://tinyurl.com/m2waue

Thankfully, both Patricia Apy http://tinyurl.com/lekgbsapy and Ricardo Zamariola, Jr. http://tinyurl.com/nn4m24 responded with factual and legally supported memoranda -- in a manner that was not calculated to make this a battle of nations. What counts here are the facts and the law as properly applied to those facts.

I agree that it is important to convince the Brazilian government to comply with its obligations under the Hague Convention and that strong economic sanctions should follow non-compliance. It seems that rule of law is not enough.

David Goldman is fortunate indeed to have such a large and supportive group behind him. Please do let me know if I can do anything to help advance the cause. I am so hopeful that Brazil will comply with the Hague Convention and return Sean, an innocent child, to his loving biological father.

I have known David Goldman since the week of the abduction. In following the legal proceedings and media coverage on www.bringseanhome.org the sad reality has become clear. The judicial system for dealing with international child abduction in Brazil is totally broken -- it does not work -- except to provide a haven for the abductors. The Hague Convention is barely given lip service, but not observed as to the letter nor the spirit of this international treaty. On the www.bringseanhome.org website supporters have been careful to avoid making this case into a USA vs Brazil campaign. We should not condemn the people of Brazil, but we should demand that the government of Brazil take responsibility for what is happening. Our government has taken some steps to make that point, most recently HR2702 was introduced by Chris Smith to remove preferential trade status from Brazil until it complies with the Hague Convention. As Americans we can and should raise our voices to get our leaders to demand that government leaders in Brazil stop this outrageous travesty of justice and violation of human rights.

I just saw news about this case. Paulo Lins e Silva and his son João should be disbarred and not allowed to practice law. It's completely unethical what they are doing. And the fact that they specialize in family law and have lectured about the Hague is a joke. Are they really that corrupt in Brazil?

Kathleen,

Thank you for posting your comment. Why will the U.S. not respond to this case in the same way it responded to the Elian Gonzales case? I agree with you. This case is an outrage. I have looked at the web site of the father and grandfather -- both high profile family lawyers. Sadly, it seems that who you are in the Brazil Family Court counts for more than the parental rights of David Goldman.

Jeanne M. Hannah

If anyone is going to the International Bar Association meeting next week in Buenos Aires, please bring this case up in the session on enforcement of the Hauge Convention. The top representative from the US state dept on this issue will be there.

The biggest reason that David cannot get his son back is that the new husband's family are from a very powerful family of attorneys who specialize in "Family Law", and have tied things up in family court against the wishes of the Brazilian Secretary of Human rights, and the attorney general. This case is an outrage with many profound implications on custody rights, civil rights, citizen rights, etc.

The comments to this entry are closed.

Toolbox

July 2017

Sun Mon Tue Wed Thu Fri Sat
            1
2 3 4 5 6 7 8
9 10 11 12 13 14 15
16 17 18 19 20 21 22
23 24 25 26 27 28 29
30 31          

Other Resources

Disclaimer

Blog powered by Typepad