Sunday, March 29, 2009
Something Worth Waiting For
Saturday, March 28, 2009
Into the Storm
Friday, March 27, 2009
Last Post Before the Off
Wednesday, March 25, 2009
Judge John V Doyle - Volusia County Florida
Countdown to Emily - 3 days and 4 nights
Tuesday, March 24, 2009
The Financial Cost of Child Abduction by Timothy Weinstein
The Financial Cost of Child Abduction
by Timothy Weinstein
Parental abduction in itself is a traumatic event for the left-behind parent. Brazil alone has over 50 cases of abduction from the United States representing over 70 children, my own two included. In addition to the emotional costs the left-behind parent must endure, one must understand the financial costs.
Due to my personal experiences, this article will focus on Brazil.
Consider the case of David Goldman; in the 4 ½ years since his son, Sean, was abducted, he has spent over $360,000 in legal and travel expenses. He is not alone and according to a December 27, 2008 article published in the Financial Post, “[Francois Larivee] has burned through $150,000, and still there is no end in sight.”
Add to this list, Marty Pate who to date has spent over $135,000, Klaus Zensen who has spent $65,000, Alessandra Oliveira is at $30,000 and counting - and the list goes on and on. Yet not one of these parents has their child back home.
From this, it appears rather obvious that the only people winning are the attorneys.
At least one parent, Gary Reilly, whose twin sons were abducted to Brazil in April, 2004, never petitioned for the return of his children due to the perceived cost of litigation. As told in a thread on BringSeanHome.org, when he consulted an attorney, “He also told me that if I went to court, be prepared to pay a minimum of at least $100,000, before anything was decided.” A different attorney in Brazil, when asked what it would cost to present in court a Hague Convention case, quoted $30,000 plus another $20,000 if the case was won. When asked if the definition of winning meant that the child was returned, the answer was “No”. Winning simply meant that the first judge ordered the return of the child, not mentioning the likely rounds of appeals.
How tragic it is that a lack of money rather than a lack of love could keep a parent from their child.
There are certain legal strategies of use to help alleviate the costs of expensive litigation related to a petition under the Hague Convention on the Civil Aspects of International Child Abduction. One such strategy is to sue the abducting parent (and any accomplices) in the United States courts. If you're lucky enough, they may have assets you can retrieve. Related to this strategy, David Goldman reached a settlement with his child's grandparents for $150,000 - a lot of money until one considers that he has spent over twice that so far in litigation. Another father, Marty Pate, was awarded $65,000 in U.S. courts, an amount unfortunately, he'll likely never see.
This situation may have changed with the Shannon-v-Khalifa precedent who was awarded a massive $3 million jury award upheld on apeal last year, yet the sting in the tail is there are no US assets to make the judgment work; the children are gone and remain overseas with no contact with their father.
What does all of this mean?
First, a left-behind parent may request an attorney from the AGU[think attorney general] in Brazil. In this instance, the Brazilian government itself becomes the plaintiff and assumes the legal fees. I, along with others, have used this arrangement, leaving precious financial resources available for travel and other expenses rather than legal fees. There are both advantages and disadvantages to this arrangement, but I'll leave that to another discussion.
Second, it allows the left-behind parent to sue in Brazil for all costs they incurred in the fight to have their child returned to his or her habitual residence. This however is predicated on the Brazilian court system first ordering the return of an abducted child, something they have done only once so far to the United States.
Where does this leave us?
Back to the first sentence of this article. While international child abduction is an inexcusable tragedy with a huge emotional bill, averting the financial cost is possible, however, it is highly problematical and there is no help with a large part of the overall costs which are not legal related - travel, accomodation and simple living expenses - and this assumes you know where your child is to start the process in the first instance.
©Timothy Weinstein 2009 – Fair use and reproduction is permitted with attribution
If you wish to contact Tim please drop me an email.
Saturday, March 21, 2009
Hague Convention Compliance - Brazil in the Spotlight but Where Will It Lead?
Visitation - Finally?
"Don't know son - we just have to try."
Friday, March 20, 2009
Is Karl Hindle full of crap?

From: angelajack123@aol.comTo:Subject: hiDo you really know Karl Hindle? he is not what he pertains to be, oh by the way am a LBP Im angela Jackson my other e mail addy is angelajack123@aol.comId like to know how you know Karl but if not thats ok, you are aware there is a rumour among certain parts UK media he has been involved with kiddie porn and a pedophille ring? i do have e mails from concerned others regard Karls inappropriate behaviour towards a minor in a pol in Fl. ? he has left 4 other kids behind in UK which he has never contributed towards. I am sure you would not wish to be brought into expose which is about to be exposed by British media on Mr. Hindle and his past?Many thanksAngela J(ackson.)Now there is no point in me getting worked up about this but I think it is disgusting that Jackson, who is also the author of many of the nasty comments I keep having to delete, can get away with this bad behaviour. Jackson is herself a mother who lost her two sons to an abduction, who then with the help of many other people of which I was one, has turned on the very people who helped her.Sadly, and very sadly at that, it turned out not to be a fairy tale ending to this abduction story but an example to all who invoke the Hague Convention that the matter may not be over - you are still open to a custody battle in the new jurisdiction you are sent to and that is exactly what happened here.Upon her two sons being returned under the Hague Convention to Scotland from Texas the boys were promptly taken into protective custody due, in part, to an assault upon one of the boys.Subsequently she lost custody due to one son reaching the age of majority and in the case of the younger, the father was found to be more fit to have custody over the child who also returned to Texas.Jackson won her Hague Convention and then allowed her bad behaviour to let her lose custody of the boys.Enter "Dr" Jill Jones-Soderman, a woman I personally believe to be a fraud and con-artist preying on parents, giving them false hope and raising money which is then used to fund her own lifestyle.The Arizona State Licensing Board agrees with me - Soderman is a fraud - refer p3 of the minutes hereSoderman is furthermore not a real doctor - she has no doctorate.Secondly, Soderman had her license to practice revoked by the State of Arizona for defrauding an elderly patient out of around $70,000 for IVF (fertility) treatment - the woman I understand, was in her 60's and subsequently died before Soderman could be charged with the criminal offences involved.Her Arizona license to practice was subsequently revoked - a license application in Texas was revoked - a New Jersey license was revoked due to misconduct including fraud and currently her New York license is under investigation (I understand).On occasion, over the six years or so since Emily was taken from the UK to the US in February 2003 and this whole affair started, I've run into people who frankly, I honestly consider to be thoroughly nasty pieces of work.There is no point in getting upset with them but best to try to avoid them and get on with the real issues at hand - international child abduction has its share of sharks and con artists - finding your child, going through the precarious process and hopefully, recovering your kids or maintaining a relationship with them.Is Karl Hindle full of crap?I say Barbara Greig of the US Department of State falsely claimed jurisdiction for Emily was in Florida and then acted to have me arrested and deported when I tried to go through the US legal process.I say Emily has been allowed to become permanently blinded in the US due to failure to treat her eye condition.I say Emily was put up for sale as part of an adoption arrangement in Wisconsin involving Leslie Merriam, a convicted child sex offender.I say many other things too but I leave it to you to decide whether I am full of crap or whether the small examples of evidence I have linked to say otherwise.For the Jackson's and Soderman's of the world - I'll lose no sleep over you nor will I be detracted from dealing with the issues concerning Emily - behave yourselves you horrible, nasty individuals.
Tuesday, March 17, 2009
Emily: "I went to dinner with my Daddy!"
Relaxing Sunday evening, the telephone rang and Emily's beautifully, indignant voice - "It's me!"
We spoke and it was fantastic listening to her tell me about her day and going to church with her "grandma" and I thought immediately, "Your grandma lives in Wisconsin?" and then an icy hand reached up through my balls to my heart as Emily told me:
Sunday, March 15, 2009
Bring Sean Home Rally - Washington DC
Thursday, March 12, 2009
Sean Goldman Abducted to Brazil - Rally in Washington DC










