We need your help

Hi All:

You may be familiar that my latest effort to obtain a visa to enter the US to continue with court hearings and to have visitation with Emily have failed as the US Embassy London has overridden Judge Doyle in FL and now permanently barred me from entering the US for visitation on the grounds I have harassed the US mother despite the repeated findings of Judge Doyle to the contrary. Further I cannot enter the US for court hearings on the grounds that I cannot demonstrate sufficient connection to the UK, despite being British, born here, maintaining a home here, working here, being a disabled veteran, all my family except Emily here, and having custody of my eldest child.

Emily is now permanently blinded in her right eye and the deposition of the convicted pedophile in Wisconsin has been taken and he has confirmed the adoption attempts by Emily's mom in Wisconsin.

The US GAO has asked for my papers on this matter which I have provided in connection with a request for them to investigate the Deaprtment of State's role in removing Emily from the UK, hiding her in the US and denying involvement in covering up the adoption/sale of Emily, placing her in the care of a pedophile in WI, allowing her to become permanently blinded in her right eye despite 9 doctors advising treatment and arranging for my arrest by the Department of Homeland Security in May 2004 and removal from the US.www.emilyrosehindle.blogspot.com

What I am asking from you

First, I'm asking that you send an email requesting that the GAO investigate the conduct of OCI and the US Embassy London in connection with Emily and the behaviour in obstructing Judge Doyle in Florida and perverting the course of justice in London UK.

You can contact Jess Ford at FordJ@gao.gov please keep your language temperate and polite - Jess has offered to look at this for me and I am grateful for his effort - please copy me in and also fraudnet@gao.gov

If you have a fax, send a fax to 202-512-3086 as well.


Also please write to the GAO - I have attached a letter that simply requires your name and address and signature and putting in the mailbox.

Second, contact Congressman Mica through Jean Carrero at jean.carrero@mail.house.gov

Again, please be polite Ms Carrero has been extremely helpful in trying to get visas and so on resolved.

Kindly ask for Congressman Mica to request oversight of the US Department of State and to intercede on Emily and my behalf and a sample letter is also attached.

Again please copy me in on the email and if you can please also copy the letter and post it to him as well - the address is on the letter.

A message form is also available on Congressman Mica's website here
http://www.house.gov/mica/messageform.shtml

If you have a child that has been internationally abducted kindly tell them that and express your concerns at this situation as it relates to getting your child back home to America.

Please keep me posted of replies and please distribute this as far and as wide as possible.

Emily and I really, really need your help.

Thanks

Karl
karlhindle@aol.com

He Says She Says - Judge Doyle-v-Sheila Fuith

It's been quite some time since I posted anything and a few people have been asking if things are ok so I thought I'd better put a few minds at rest.

Yesterday I paid a visit to the US Embassy in London and was interviewed for a visa to go back to Florida and Washington DC so I could see Emily and continue with the legal process in America.

I had to get a police report from the British police documenting that I have no criminal or arrest record here in the UK which I did and along with my tenancy agreement for my home and all the other paraphanalia to demonstrate I have a right to see Emily, court orders and such.

I was interviewed by a young lady who rejected my visa request. I asked why, and she advised me while tapping away at her keyboard with wonderfully manicured nails that:

"It's very honorable that you want to see your daughter but you are permanently ineligible for a visa for access because you've harassed the mother."

I gave her my court orders from Judge Doyle that rejected the mothers request for a domestic violence injunction along with my court order for access and all I got was:

"We've overridden them, you are permanently ineligible for a visa and that is that."

More furious tapping at the keyboard ensued with those lovely nails rattling away - I thought she's going to break them !

I asked why I couldn't have a visa for going to court and what I got was:

"You have an attorney you don't need to go to court."

Extra furious tapping from the keyboard, sounding like heavy rain on a tin roof.

"But I'm filing in federal court and representing myself, I need to be there."

The tattoo of keystrokes didn't miss a beat and without looking up she told me:

"Get an attorney to do that for you. You cannot demonstrate sufficient connection to the UK Mr Hindle so I have to presume you are an immigrant so I'm not allowing a visa for that."

I countered, transfixed by the dexterity of the finger manipulations wondering if she actually was typing anything or just using the activity to avoid looking me in the eye:

"How can you say I don't have sufficient connections to the UK, I'm British, I'm a veteran, I have a house here, I look after my eldest child, I'm studying here what more can anyone do to show they are connected to the UK?"

The rat-a-tat-tat stopped and looking me in the eye for the first time she says:

"I'm not giving you a visa."

I said it was just shameful how the State Department was behaving, but nothing was said as those beautiful fingers picked up the paperwork and put them in the out tray and pushed a rejection notice under the glass window that separated us.

"Have nice day!" followed me as I left the cubicle.

I left for home and sobbed in the toilet compartment of the train home. I'll never see Emily again and Judge Doyle's Florida court orders are worth nothing while I cannot even go to court in the US - the used toilet paper I found left in the bowl of the toilet on the train home has more value than all of the court orders from the British Supreme Court, the Hague Convention and the court room of His Honor Judge John V Doyle in Florida. I flushed that excrement ridden piece of paper down the toilet as effectively as Ms Manicured Fingernails flushed Judge Doyle's court orders and our rights earlier that day at the US Embassy - at least it is now fertilizing the weeds that grow on the train track somewhere between London Liverpool Street and the train station at Hatfield Peverel.

These custody cases are often "He said, She said" driven but it's a new twist when "The Judge says and She says" but the State Department sides with mom and not the American judge.

US Embassy Visa Shennanigins ... again

OK - here we go again :)

I telephoned the US Embassy visa operator to try to sort out a visa appointment as Maria Damour and the visa section at the US Embassy in London have not responded to requests for me to get a visa interview appointment (the first step in getting a visa).

At £1.20 a minute (that's about $2.50 a minute for US readers) I was on the telephone for about 20 minutes trying to sort out an appointment - the visa operator finally came back with- you need to email the US Embassy with this so here it is (for a 3rd time):

From: karlhindle@aol.com
Show/Hide all the To recipientsTo: londonconsular@state.gov
Show/Hide all the CC recipientsCC: Jean.Carrero@mail.house.gov, graeme.wise@fco.gov.uk, dcarter@reunite.demon.co.uk, kruckman@state@gov, dferguson@ormondlawfirm.com, lucy.benyon@express.co.uk

Subject: ciu760 FAO: Maria Damour - Hindle re: visa appointment
Date: Thu, 26 Apr 2007 4.41PM
Attachments:
Immigration_Report.2.jpg (218K)greigfax.0.jpg (179K)


Dear Ms Damour:

I have spoken with the US Embassy visa appointment line and have been advised to contact you again.

This is the third such email I have sent to the US Embassy in accordance with instructions of the visa operator - I have received no replies from the first two.

I have been advised that I cannot proceed with obtaining a visa appointment without emailing you in respect of the following:

1. I am applying to British police for a Subject Access Statement as instructed by the operator:
2. I was refused a visa in September 2006 by the US Embassy London:
A. for court ordered access to minor child on the grounds I have harassed the US citizen mother of my minor child in the US (despite the findings of the US court that I have not done so and court orders repeatedly provided to you and the US Embassy); and
B. for attendance and prosecution of court proceedings in Volusia County Florida in connection with minor child on the grounds I am attempting to emigrate to the United States.

The visa operator advises me that the US Embassy needs to provide me with the visa refusal codes before they can offer an appointment date; and

3. That given my arrest by US Immigration in Florida on 28th May 2004 I must provide a sworn statement from an entity you must specify in the United States in a form you will specify as to the circumstances of that arrest. I have appended a copy of the US immigration arrest report of the arresting officer Wayne Baehre and a fax to US Immigration by Barbara Greig of the State Department, which demonstrates my arrest was predicated on information provided by Barbara J Greig, Office of Childrens Issues, Department of State, Washington DC.

I understand you require the following:

Name: Karl Ernest Hindle
Nationality: British
Passport Number: 305478269
Email address : Karlhindle@ol.com

Karl Hindle
5 Berwick Cottages
Terling Hall Road
Hatfield Peverel
Essex CM3 2EY
UNITED KINGDOM

US Department of State - Partial Release of US Passport Application for Emily Rose

US Department of State continues to withhold paperwork

I recently received page 3 of a US Passport application made for Emily Rose in January 2003 - the US passport that was issued to Emily Rose in order to remove her from the UK to the US.

The US Department of State continues to withhold the rest of the paperwork that was requested, including the supporting forms for the issuance of the passport and internal communications regarding the role of various State Department officials in removing and hiding Emily Rose in the US.

What does this mean ?

One of the pieces of paper provided purports to be my consent to the issuance of the passport - except the law required my signed notarized consent and guess what - it isn't my signature and it isn't notarized, so where did it come from ?

Interestingly enough, the passport application page is dated January 2003 but the "consent" form is dated April 2002 - does that seem strange to you because it sure does to me.

I'm waiting on the outcome of a show cause motion for Maria Damour to show cause for her contempt of the federal proceedings in Orlando, Florida - the explanation from the US Attorney General is that the defendants i.e. various State Department officials do not recognise the jurisdiction of the federal court in Orlando, Florida.....hmmmmm.

Watch this space.

Tech Tags: US passport US+Embassy Emily+Rose State+Department Maria+Damour

Australian a danger to Baby - so the headline goes

Abduction from Australia to Alabama, US

Recently reported in the Alabama Press-Register is this case of a baby taken from Australia to Alabama, US.

Mom is an American, Susan Elizabeth Beaty and moved to Australia where she had a relationship with an Australian, Gareth Baran and a child was subsequently born.

Mother claims domestic violence, heavy drinking and that dad is a threat to the child.

Dad claims mom abducted the child from Australia to the US and is standing on the Hague Convention on the Civil Aspects of International Child Abduction for the return of the child to the jurisdiction of Australia.

The case is scheduled to be heard by a federal judge sometime later this month and it will be interesting to see the outcome - the attorney for the mother claims that the father gave consent for the removal and that he represents a clear danger to the child.

These things are never clear on the face of them - if Gareth Baran gave consent then Susan Beaty is going to have demonstrate that absolutely - she is the one who has the burden of evidencing her claims here. The issues of domestic violence, I personally think, should be better heard by the court where the evidence is available and that means back in Australia but will the federal court in the US agree ? This is a source of much debate in the US and elsewhere these days and I am concerned that this the thin end of the wedge in slowing proceedings down.

If the issue of "best interests" of one of the parents is to start playing a part in Hague Convention proceedings then it becomes much less sustainable to argue the "best interests of the child" should not also play a part in the process - at this time, the only "best interest" of the child that figures in Hague Convention proceedings is that proceedings should take place in the country of habitual residence and a return shall be effected as quickly as possible - if dad is an alcoholic deadbeat, that is not relevant to a return order under the Hague Convention but it will become relevant for the court of habitual residence just the same as if a mom is medically neglecting a child, placing them up for adoption or endangering them by placing them into contact with a convicted pedophile.

Let's see how this one gets handled by the US judge.

Tech Tags: adoption Alabama Australia domestic+violence Hague+Convention international+child+abduction Pedophile US

Emily's Dad Quoted on Opinio Juris

Karl Hindle quoted extensively by Opinio Juris

Roger Alford of Pepperdine School of Law quoted Karl Hindle in full on a recent posting on international child abduction:

Roger Alford (mail):
I received this thoughtful email from a reader and I forward it to you without attribution (but with permission):

Hi Roger:

Noted your post on Opinio Juris and I have these suggestions in response to how to further prevent international abductions:

Prevention i.e. before a child is removed
1. Rigorous enforcement of the two parent signature law (Nance/Donovan etc) for passport issuance to minors within and without the US (removal of passport issuance function from the Department of State);
2. Cessation of domestic violence exception in 8 CFR 51 for issuance of passports to minors
3. Exit controls at point of departure from locations within the US (currently there are none - have passport will travel);
4. Federal level legislation and control - (at the State level it is worthless as it is so easily by-passed and if a child is removed from the US, federal level intervention alone will carry weight with a non-US jurisdiction, State warrants are practically useless) cf Synclair-Cannon Law, California (Larry Synclair and Josef Cannon - put either name in google and you'll find the legislation) - further unilateral state legislation eg Nebraskan LB 341 sponsor Senator Schimek, can compromise international cooperation between the whole of the US and another HC contracting state.


Cure i.e. after a child is taken
1. Rigorous enforcement of the Hague Convention and obligations imposed upon the US in the event of a return of a child to the United States - currently it is a take it or leave it buffet, once a child is sent to the US for proceedings an abducting parent subsequently has very little chance of fair proceedings in the US which is causing "disquiet" abroad;
2. Removal of administration and functions of the US Central Authority from the Department of State to the Department of Justice - in practice, the US has a reputation for operating a three-tier system in regard to international abductions based upon a sliding scale of diplomatic expediency, then gender and claims of domestic violence and thereafter you have a catch-all - this is not appropriate, a legalistic approach to the Hague Convention is required not a diplomatic one (note the US is the only contracting state to the HC that has the Central Authority embedded in it's foreign service and not the justice department);
3. Full adoption of the HC by the US - at present it has reserved on certain aspects such as providing free legal representation for HC hearings (in the UK it is fully expensed by the UK taxpayer and in many other contracting states but this is not reciprocated); and
4. Full accounting by the US Central Authority of returns and access orders granted AND enforced - currently the US claims a 90% return rate (Asst Sec of State Maura Harty &Ernie Allen NCMEC) however no substantive evidence to support this has ever been provided despite censure by Congress and the GAO - the only study of comparative return rates I am aware of is that of Professor Lowe, Law Professor Cardiff University UK which indicates that under reported HC cases a return of 52% from the US is demonstrated - this is an average result for the largest budget in the world.

These suggestions do not directly assist US parents in recovery but the first thing the HC is about is mutual trust not custody issues - to this end it is interesting to read what foreign judges have had to say about returning children to the US (as it is after all a non-US judge that will determine a return or not) cf Tom Johnson and Sweden non-return (google him); Josef Cannon in the High Court London UK non-return to the US.

Presently, the US is perceived by many in the EU and elsewhere as a major violator of the HC, not officially of course, but judges, practitioners and civil servants abroad are not stupid and many EU states only allow a small pool of judges to hear HC cases who have gained experience of events after a US return is made, it does not generally make for happy reading - there have been several cases of children sent to the US on the basis that it will protect a child and has failed, several spring to mind involving Sweden, UK, Germany and Spain.

Suggestions for HC Development
1. Reciprocal agreements between contracting states regarding use of their jurisdictions as safe havens - ICARA/IKPA deal with abductions out of the US but not to it, I think this is a fundamental weakness in the current HC aproach of dealing with the issue after the child has been taken - imposing sanctions on a parent who abducts to your jurisdiction may be a better way of preventing an abduction to begin with rather than the current cat-and-mouse game with an abducting parent simply hiding until a child is settled in the new environment;
2. Sanctions against non-compliant contracting states e.g. suspension of returns, demand for monetary damages enforceable and mandated at the Hague, enforcement powers at the Hague for dispute resolution;
3. Contracting states provide "attributable rights" to foreign parents litigating in the jurisdiction - by this I mean, a right to freely enter and leave a contracting state (i.e. no visas or no revocation of spousal visas upon divorce cf Japan); same rights and protections as a native of a contracting state would enjoy eg privacy (US Privacy Act and current State Department practice as outlined in FAM 7 denies a right to privacy for a non-citizen for instance) - this develops art 7 &21 and the removal of obstructions by contracting states to resolution;
4. Change the name of the HC from "Child Abduction" to "Jurisdiction for Child Hearings" as with the UCCJA/UCCJEA - abduction = kidnapping in laymans eyes, even for law enforcement and social services and it is not - it benefits no-one to make this a more emotive affair.

Tech Tags: Hague+Convention ICARA IKPA international+child+abduction Opinio+Juris UCCJA UCCJEA State+Department Justice+Department

The First Lady on International Child Abduction

Laura Bush at the International Centre for Missing & Exploited Children Conference

Elysée Palace,Paris, France - January 17th, 2007

"The United States made missing and exploited children a priority in 1981"

First Lady Laura Bush of the United States of America January 2007

I recently came across this press release issued by the Whitehouse press center after the First Lady of America, Laura Bush addressed an international conference hosted in Paris, France by President Chirac.

I agree wholeheartedly with Mrs Bush's sentiments but I do have serious issues with the gap between words and deeds. There is a call for greater foreign government cooperation

Every country must educate its citizens, especially women and children, so they can avoid this degradation

however very scant attention is paid to the void that exists for parents who have children abducted to America or from America.





In the pecking order of priorities it is clear that international child abduction ranks extremely low, not only for local agencies and law enforcement but at the Whitehouse.

The majority of Mrs Bush's address dealt with the international issue of child pornography and the growing international response to dealing with perpetrators of this heinous crime.

Let's put this in perspective - international child abduction-v-international child pornography - I cannot disagree that child pornography must be tackled and must receive a higher priority than international child abduction and I write as a parent who's child has been taken across international boundaries and given into the care of a convicted pedophile.

When I found that Emily Rose was being "adopted" in Wisconsin in April 2003 I was staggered and frightened however when I found that this was happening from a convicted pedophile who advised me his son was adopting Emily Rose and he (the pedophile) had also been looking after her, I was terrified beyond anything I have ever experienced in my existence on this planet.

What I feel needs to be done is to educate senior leaders in America, Europe and around the world that international child abduction needs more attention too, not allowed to be an also ran that is disposed of rather than dealt with. Mrs Bush does not seem so far away from that sentiment as she goes on to state:

"A society shows its character in the way it treats its most vulnerable citizens. Each of us can help protect children in our societies, and every country must help protect children in our global society."

Mrs Bush, if you ever get to read this - salut as President Chirac would say, but please do not forget to mention the thousands of children who are internationaly abducted and at great risk as a consequence next time you have the opportunity and I write as a parent who's child taken to America, has been allowed to go blind.

Tech Tags: Laura+Bush First+Lady America international+child+abduction Missing+and+Exploited Children child+pornography Pedophile blindness child+abuse

Angelina Jolie and Melissa Hawach

Melissa Hawach recovers Cedar & Hannah from Lebanon

Melissa Hawach recently recovered her two daughters from the Lebanon after a three continent battle to get them home to Canada from her estranged husband, Joseph Hawach.





This case started last year when Joseph Hawach took the two girls for a vacation to Australia but they ended up in the Lebanon with Mr Hawach and his mother.

After locating Cedar and Hannah in the Lebanon, Melisa Hawach reunited with the children at a school playground and eventually returned to Canada after a two month cat and mouse chase to evade Joseph and his supporters through Jordan and Syria..

Two "helpers", Brian Corrigan and David Pemberton, private security specialists currently languish in a Lebanese jail for "assisting" in this matter though the charges against them have recently been downgraded and the Lebanese court apparently now accepts Melissa has custody over the children.

Lebanon is not a signatory to the Hague Convention on the Civil Aspects of International Child Abduction which makes it at the same time more difficult to pursue a resolution through the legal process but easier if you go the so called "self-help" route. Joseph, a dual Lebanese/Australian citizen has outstanding charges pending in Canada for international child kidnapping and custodial interference.





In the style of Betty Mahmoudi, who managed to recover her daughters from Iran and the tale was turned into a film "Not without my Daughters" starring Sally Fields, movie offers are flooding in for the movie rights.

Hollywood heavyweight, Angelina Jolie has or is in the process of bidding for the film rights after the story broke in an Australian newspaper.

It will be interesting to see what happens with this and it is noteworthy that this case has so speedily been resolved without the Hague Convention - I think I can safely speculate that if the Hague Convention had been in situ, then this matter would still be dragging on to the detriment of Cedar and Hannah.

Tech Tags: Angelina+Jolie Melissa Hawach Cedar Hannah Lebanon Australia Canada Hague+Convention international+child+abduction custodial+interference Betty+Mahmoudi Not+without+my+daughters Sally+Fields movie+rights Beirut

International Child Abduction and Domestic Violence

Causes of International Child Abductions


I read this this morning in my google alerts:

"

MOTHERS are responsible for seven out of 10 international parental child abductions, an Australian study has found. And the most common reason for the abduction is flight from an abusive relationship.

"

My first reaction was "hello, mens rights at it again" but the article comes from Australia and the study is that of the International Social Science Australia entitled "Learning From The Links Between Domestic Violence And International Parental Child Abduction".

Now I haven't read the paper so I cannot comment on the conclusions but I do believe it will be a fair assumption to say that 70% of the respondents CLAIM domestic violence exists rather than it ACTUALLY being shown to exist - a much smaller proportion will have justifiable domestic violence as an element of the motivation to abduct than in fact.

The issue of domestic violence and international child abductions is difficult to navigate - one jurisdiction/party's justifiable flight from harm is anothers international child abduction.

The Hague Convention deals with issues such as domestic violence through Article 13(b) which allows a presiding judge to exercise discretion (note discretion not requires) to refuse to allow a return of a child that has been wrongfully removed from a country of habitual residence in those circumstances where there is a grave risk of physical and psychological harm to the child which is "intolerable".

By intolerable, consider this analogy that I was given by David Thelen of The Committee for Missing Children - you hold your outstretched palm above a candle, as you slowly bring your hand down you feel the heat of the flame but that is tolerable, as you bring your hand closer it starts to be painful until your hand is so close to the flame that you are actually burning - that is intolerable.

In this instance, The Hague Convention actually should result in the return of children whose mothers claim to be victims of domestic violence as this would for the most part not satisify the extremely high mark of "intolerable". I read a case last year where a mother fleeing from Venezuela after a hit man had been hired to kill her satisfied the test and though she had internationally abducted the children involved they were not returned due to the danger.

In Sheila Kay Fuith-v-Karl Ernest Hindle re ERH (a minor) I argued that Emily Rose should not be sent to Florida on the basis that the adoption attempt/sale of Emily, placing Emily into the care of a convicted child sex offender and medical neglect for her eye condition represented a an intolerable situation for the purposes of Art 13(b) of The Hague Convention. It was rejected as not satisfying the test.

Domestic violence features in the vast majority of international child abduction cases almost as a matter of course, what needs to impressed is that domestic violence only of the highest viciousness is regarded as a justification for international child abduction and by that it means the threat must be against the children and not the mother.

Clearly there is some way to go with the Hague Convention, but the debate that is raging particularly in America, on article 13(b) and interests of the child creeping into the otherwise summary proceedings to return a child, are likely to taint Hague Convention proceedings with procrastination and dogmatic complications on top of those implicit with the international dimension.

Generally, the vast majority of domestic violence allegations, founded or not, are not a proper justification for international child abduction - international child abduction is child abuse not child protection.

Tech Tags: international+child+abduction Australia American UK Venezuela domestic+violence Hague+Convention article +13(b) intolerable David+Thelen Emily+Rose Karl +Hindle Sheila+Kay+Fuith

Robert Skelton - Father searching for his child taken from Florida

International Child Abduction - My Alter Ego in Florida






Reported in the Daytona Beach Journal - click here for the article


I'll be contacting Robert as I may be able to help him in finding his child but I think that the mirror nature of our cases serves to underlie the difficulties that he is going to face in finding his child, getting access or return of the child to Florida - not because of the allegations of domestic violence and so on, these unfortunately are par for the course.

Robert is going to face tremendous difficulties because he is simply an American and one from Florida at that and he will have to deal with the appallingly bad reputation that has been created by US officials in positions of responsibility that have failed to protect children in the past - in Washington DC and in Florida as well as on your doorstep in DeLand and DeBary.

Emily (my daughter) was taken 4 years ago with the assistance of the US Department of State based on claims I was domestically violent and they also made it a condition I was not to know where Emily was in the US (I have been repeatedly cleared of these claims by the courts and investigations)

2 months after being taken, Emily was put up for sale in WI and into the care of a convicted pedophile.

Emily was born with an eye defect which would render her permanently blind if untreated - she has received no medical treatment in the US and is now permanently blinded despite numerous British and US doctors advising treatment.

Emily has been moved about 40 times through 10 states in the US and was even missing and classified as endangered at one point.

VCSO Captain Osowski has falsified police reports while my PI observed the mother playing patsy with one of his Deputies in order to convince US Immigration I was a threat and a menace to the mother and my child, and was assisted in this by State Department officials in Washington DC who asked for my arrest in 2004 to stop court hearings in DeLand.

Even with a federal court order ordering my attendance in FL in connection with federal proceedings against the US Department of State - I am barred from entering the US for court ordered visitation with Emily (she was 5 yesterday) or from coming to court.

As for DCF....I have files and recordings that show they falsified their files, tapes of them telling me my daughter being given to a pedophile was a protective custody arrangement and that though Emily was treatable for her blindness this is not medical neglect as it is not life threatening.

What is upsetting is that this behaviour has been seen so many many times with European children and parents in the US and that it is causing a backlash - Robert will probably find his child and I will help him, but is he likely to get the child back, depends - and I have dozens of cases where perfectly good US parents lose their children because of poor official behaviour creating a terrible reputation for Americans that they simply do not deserve.

Emily and I will probably never see each other again no matter what Judge Doyle in DeLand rules if he ever has the chance to hear the case.

Robert+Skelton international+child+abduction Florida Emily+Rose Daytona+Beach domestic+violence American VCSO DCF Hague+Convention NCMEC State+Department

No Happy Birthday for Emily

"Ms Fuith Does Not Wish to Hinder Mr Hindle from wishing Emily a Happy Birthday"

Emily was 5 years old on March 1st, last Thursday - I went through my lawyer to see if we could speak to Emily to wish her a happy birthday and the response came back as follows from Ms Kim Bannister of Legal Services of Central Florida in Daytona FL attorneys for Sheila Fuith, which was emailed to me and I have cut and pasted verbatim:


"Karl: I’m going to type out Kim Banister’s response to our request for telephonic contact today:


It is unfortunate that Mr. Hindle has waited until the last minute to ask to speak to Emily for her birthday today. Ms. Fuith had already made plans for this evenings birthday celebration and will not be back at the house until late. Please provide us with alternative dates and times as Ms. Fuith does not want to hinder Mr. Hindle from wishing Emily a happy birthday.


In the future, advanced notice would probably result in a more favorable outcome for Mr. Hindle for any holiday/birthday telephone visitation requests outside of the agreed upon schedule, as Ms. Fuith does make plans for these special days.

I look forward to hearing from you soon on this matter."

Max and I did call, but we just got the answer machine - I wonder if Emily will get her presents from us this time around or will they end up "missing" like the Christmas gifts and cards we sent ?

Simply shameful Kim Bannister, I think you're a good attorney and just doing your job, but I wonder if you act like this with your child ?

To date Emily has had 5 birthdays and 5 Christmas' - we have only had contact for one of each very special occassion while there is no communication with Sheila at all - just a dark horibble nothing for no reason except to be cruel, vicious, vindictive no matter that it hurts an innocent child.

I came across a quote yesterday it goes something like this:

"Love leaves it's mark, Hate leaves it's mark but we choose ourselves which mark we decide to leave."

I love you Emily Rose and I always will.

Happy Birthday from all of us.

Daddy

Tech Tags: love, hate, Happy Birthday, Emily Rose, Kim Bannister, Sheila Fuith, Karl Hindle

Happy Birthday Emily !

Happy Birthday Emily Rose

Last night Max and I spoke with Emily - she was excited with her news "Dad, do you know what day it is tomorrow? It's my BIRTHDAY !"

Emily is 5 years old today - another birthday that we will not be allowed to share with her nor her with us - but we love you darling, all of us, we love you very, very much.

Hopefully today, we will be able to speak to her on her birthday but I have to wait on the lawyers seeing if Sheila (Emily's mother) will agree.

Tech Tags: Happy Birthday Emily Rose love Sheila Fuith

International Child Abduction legitimised by Nebraska Bill and violates The Hague Convention

,US Nebraska Law Sanctions International Child Abduction

A new law passed in Nebraska authorises the seizure of jurisdiction to that state from a non-US country (in this case Canada) and was promulgated and signed into law in order to block court ordered visitation to a Canadian father.

The US mother of the child has alleged physical abuse and sexual molestation of the child by the father during visitation, however there have been no criminal filings and to date, no evidence except the mothers say so as far as I can see.

State Senator DiAnna Schimek of Lincoln, Nebraska sponsored Bill 341 and it was signed into law by Governor Dave Heineman a week or so ago after passing the State Legislator 48-0.

The Canadian courts hold jurisdiction and continue to order visitation but Nebraska by this law has seized jurisdiction and is holding hearings on the allegations while blocking visitation.

International treaties such as The Hague Convention on the Civil Aspects of International Child Abduction and virtually every state in the US (including Nebraska) have laws that state a court where the child was living when custody proceedings are filed retains jurisdiction and only in "extraordinary" circumstances can measures be taken by courts outside that country.

This appears to be yet another violation of The Hague Convention on The Civil Aspects of International Child Abduction by the US, who seem to take a buffet approach to the treaty and enforce only those aspects of it that they wish to but ignore their obligations in others - typically when it benefits an abducting US parent in the United States.

In this instance a Nebraskan judge has blocked the father from visitation pending a hearing on an emergency basis and now the US will assume jurisdiction over the child after the abuse hearings are complete in complete violation of the international treaties and the US UCCJEA.

Whatever the merit of the allegations against the father, it is only in exceptional circumstances that jurisdiction of the original court can be usurped by a foreign court - in this instance there is nothing extraordinary, indeed the Nebraskan court is acting on an "emergency" basis. This is unjust US State sanctioned abduction and abrogation of an international treaty that appears to have been railroaded through the Nebraskan Senate.

I find this very disturbing, perhaps it is time for a revamp of the Hague Convention so it says it applies only when the US says so and not to their own - I wonder if the federal system will intervene in this particular matter, that will be very interesting as will the reaction of the Canadians.

When will the US learn that this type of behaviour makes it much more difficult for the hundreds of US parents coming to foreign countries asking for children to be returned - after all an American judge does not hear these cases but a foreign one.

Talk about shooting yourself in the foot.

US child international abduction Hague Convention Hague+Convention children federal mother father justice International+Child+Abduction child+abduction

Karl Hindle-v-US Secretary of State Dr Condoleeza Rice et al - Update on the Federal Action

Hindle-v-Rice Federal action developments

In October 2006, His Honor Judge Gregory Presnell ordered that the parties shall meet in the Middle District of Florida to hold a Case Management Report meeting in the Federal action brought (case number: 06:6cv1527)said meeting to take place within 60 days of the order.

I sent my court order together with my passport and a covering letter requesting a visa to enter the US for the purpose of meeting with the US Attorney General in Orlando to handle the CMR and start getting to grips with the federal legal process. The request was addressed to Maria Damour, Chief of the Non-Immigrant Visa section at the US Embassy London, UK.

It promptly came back with a curt refusal to process a visa without being interviewed, so I contacted the US Embassy visa appointment line but they would not give me an interview date and I was to call again in January 2007.

I explained I had a federal court order and a judge had ordered this meeting and I was directed to send an email with the information and a code in the subject header to the US Embassy.

I received no reply.

I contacted the US Embassy again in January 2007 and again was told I could not be interviewed and I had to send an email duplicating the information I had sent in November 2006. I did this and addressed it to Maria Damour and contacted her assistant at the US Embassy London and advised her of the federal order and the need to travel to Florida as ordered by Judge Presnell.

I have received no reply from Ms Maria Damour.

Maria Damour is also a defendant in the Federal action Hindle-v-Rice.

Make of that what you will.

Tech Tags: Federal court international+child+abduction Karl+Hindle Emily+Rose London Maria+Damour Presnell State+Department US+Embassy US+Secretary+of+State Condoleeza+Rice

Louise Campbell refused Legal Aid - Fred Jackson given Legal Aid - what is going on !

My previous post on who foots the bill in international child abduction asked the question which the British taxpayer ought to know.

Louise Campbell, has a child Molly Campbell/Misbah Rana abducted to Pakistan - that this was an abduction is a finding of fact by the court in Pakistan and in Scotland -it had to be as a consequence of the UK/Pakistan Judicial Protocol, a simplified version of The Hague Convention on the Civil Aspects of International Child Abduction which Pakistan has not acceded to.

Louise Campbell has "acquiesced" in the abduction - in plain English, she's given up - because she is potless.

No money = No lawyer, no airfare, no accomodation, NO JUSTICE !

How much has the British taxpayer contributed to her effort to recover an abducted child ?

Answer: £0.00

So here we are with a British/Pakistani child abducted from the UK to Pakistan and we pay £0.00 - and Louise Campbell cannot carry on the legal process to have Molly Campbell/Misbah Rana returned to her country of habitual residence for her future to be determined - that is, a Scottish court to decide on whether Louise Campbell or Sajed Rana should have primary residency of Molly/Misbah.

Now riddle me this - an American, Fred Jackson abducted two Scottish boys to Texas, I can say this because it is a finding of fact by Judge Lopez in Texas, US. The children have been returned to Scotland in the care of their mother, Angela Jackson under the Hague Convention for proceedings to take place as to who should be the primary residential parent, access, child support and so on.

Fred Jackson is an international child abductor according to the US court.

Fred has a Scottish solicitor representing him in the custody proceedings in Scotland.

Who is paying for his lawyer ?

The British taxpayer through the Legal Aid fund that has issued and extended a Legal Aid certificate. ££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££ !

So we will not pay for a British parent to recover their child but we will pay for a foreign abductor of two British children to come here.

Someone please explain in ethical and moral terms the logic or fairness in this situation because The Secretary of the President at the Royal Courts of Justice cannot:


Dear Mr Hindle

Given the differences in funding mechanisms (for example in England and Wales some people would be eligible for legal aid, others would not) in different countries. I am unable to assist you any further in this subject.

Miss Sam Sprague

Private Secretary to the
President of Family Division
and Head of Family Justice


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: karlhindle@aol.com [mailto:karlhindle@aol.com]
Sent: 25 January 2007 14:58
To: Sprague, Sam
Cc: stevesmithpress@btinternet.com; gail.cameron@the-sun.co.uk
Subject: Re: UK/Pakistan Judicial Protocol & Legal Costs Query



Dear Miss Sprague,

My apologies for referring to you as "Mr", I'm sure that must occur often in correspondence exchanges.

You are designated as the contact in the UK/Pakistan Judicial Protocol information and I shall be grateful for an answer.

The questions relating to the cost incurred by non-UK taxpayers abroad cannot be answered by the Legal Services Commission as I am sure you are aware.

I look forward to receiving answers to my queries.

Yours sincerely

s/Karl Hindle

-----Original Message-----
From: Sam.Sprague@judiciary.gsi.gov.uk
To: karlhindle@aol.com
Sent: Thu, 25 Jan 2007 2.49PM
Subject: FW: UK/Pakistan Judicial Protocol & Legal Costs Query

Dear Mr Hindle

As all the points raised in your email message relate to legal costs and therefore the spending of public funds, your enquiry is best directed to the Legal Services Commission at:

85 Gray’s inn Road
London
WC1X 8TX

0207 759 0000

Miss Sam Sprague
Private Secretary to the
President of Family Division
and Head of Family Justice

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: karlhindle@aol.com [mailto:karlhindle@aol.com]
Sent: 25 January 2007 01:55
To: Sam.Sprague@courtservice.gsi.gov.uk
Cc: stevesmithpress@btinternet.com; gail.cameron@the-sun.co.uk
Subject: UK/Pakistan Judicial Protocol & Legal Costs Query



24th January 2007


Mr S Sprague

The Family Division Lawyer,
President's Chambers,
Royal Courts of Justice,
Strand,
London WC2A 2LL



Dear Mr Sprague,

International Child Abduction Legal Costs

With regards to the operation of the UK/Pakistan Judicial Protocol (the "Protocol") would you be so kind to answer the following two questions:

1. If a child is wrongfully removed or retained under the Protocol in Pakistan, will the left behind British parents' legal costs in utilising the Protocol be met by the Pakistani taxpayer ?

2. If a child is wrongfully removed or retained under the Protocol in the UK, will the left behind Pakistani parents' legal costs in utilising the Protocol be met by the British taxpayer ?

With regards to The Hague Covention on the Civil Aspects of International Child Abduction ("The Hague Convention") would you be so kind as to answer the following two questions:

1. If a child is wrongfully removed or retained from the US under The Hague Convention in the United Kingdom, will the left behind US parents' legal costs in utilising The Hague Convention be met by the British taxpayer ?

2. If a child is wrongfully removed or retained from the UK under The Hague Convention in the United States, will the left behind UK parents legal costs in utilising The Hague Convention be met by the US taxpayer ?

I look forward to hearing from you.

Yours sincerely

Karl Hindle

PLEASE NOTE: THE ABOVE MESSAGE WAS RECEIVED FROM THE INTERNET.
On entering the GSI, this email was scanned for viruses by the Government Secure Intranet (GSi) virus scanning service supplied exclusively by Cable & Wireless in partnership with MessageLabs.
In case of problems, please call your organisational IT Helpdesk.
The MessageLabs Anti Virus Service is the first managed service to achieve the CSIA Claims Tested Mark (CCTM Certificate Number 2006/04/0007), the UK Government quality mark initiative for information security products and services. For more information about this please visit www.cctmark.gov.uk

This e-mail (and any attachment) is intended only for the attention of the addressee(s). Its unauthorised use, disclosure, storage or copying is not permitted. If you are not the intended recipient, please destroy all copies and inform the sender by return e-mail.

Internet e-mail is not a secure medium. Any reply to this message could be intercepted and read by someone else. Please bear that in mind when deciding whether to send material in response to this message by e-mail.

This e-mail (whether you are the sender or the recipient) may be monitored, recorded and retained by the Department For Constitutional Affairs. E-mail monitoring / blocking software may be used, and e-mail content may be read at any time. You have a responsibility to ensure laws are not broken when composing or forwarding e-mails and their contents.

The original of this email was scanned for viruses by Government Secure Intranet (GSi) virus scanning service supplied exclusively by Cable & Wireless in partnership with MessageLabs.
On leaving the GSI this email was certified virus free.
The MessageLabs Anti Virus Service is the first managed service to achieve the CSIA Claims Tested Mark (CCTM Certificate Number 2006/04/0007), the UK Government quality mark initiative for information security products and services. For more information about this please visit www.cctmark.gov.uk


Louise+Campbell Molly+Campbell Misbah+Rana Angela+Jackson Fred+Jackson International+Child+Abduction

Who foots the bill in an international child abduction ?

In 2003 there was a Hague Convention hearing regarding my daughter Emily that took place in London - my American ex-partner who had already removed Emily from the UK was provided with a solicitor and barrister at the cost of the British taxpayer - a condition of The Hague Convention BUT British parents using The Hague Convention in the United States have to pay their own costs - why ?

In the light of the refusal by the Legal Aid Board to fund Louise Campbell's legal fight for Molly/Misbah to be returned to Scotland for proceedings to determine her future, is the Pakistani taxpayer paying her legal bills and if the reverse was true, say Misbah wanted to come to Scotland and become Molly, would the British taxpayer pick up the legal bill for the Pakistani parent ?

I wrote the letter below to Sam Sprague at the Royal Courts of Justice to find out and emailed it today.


24th January 2007

Mr S Sprague
The Family Division Lawyer,
President's Chambers,
Royal Courts of Justice,
Strand,
London WC2A 2LL

Dear Mr Sprague,

International Child Abduction Legal Costs

With regards to the operation of the UK/Pakistan Judicial Protocol (the "Protocol") would you be so kind to answer the following two questions:

1. If a child is wrongfully removed or retained under the Protocol in Pakistan, will the left behind British parents' legal costs in utilising the Protocol be met by the Pakistani taxpayer ?

2. If a child is wrongfully removed or retained under the Protocol in the UK, will the left behind Pakistani parents' legal costs in utilising the Protocol be met by the British taxpayer ?

With regards to The Hague Covention on the Civil Aspects of International Child Abduction ("The Hague Convention") would you be so kind as to answer the following two questions:

1. If a child is wrongfully removed or retained from the US under The Hague Convention in the United Kingdom, will the left behind US parents' legal costs in utilising The Hague Convention be met by the British taxpayer ?

2. If a child is wrongfully removed or retained from the UK under The Hague Convention in the United States, will the left behind UK parents legal costs in utilising The Hague Convention be met by the US taxpayer ?

I look forward to hearing from you.

Yours sincerely

Karl Hindle

Tech Tags: Hague+Convention international+child+abduction UK/Pakistan Judicial Protocol Karl+Hindle

Molly Campbell/Misbah Rana

I received a comment to my last post on Renfrewshire Social Services and I replied to it, however I think the writer, called Angela (but not the same Angela Jackson) wrote such an informed and humane comment that I am moved to make it a post together with my response.

Whoever you are Angela, contact me please and thank you for taking the time to write:

"Angela Jackson and Louise Campbell deserve equal compassion and help, and for the same reasons. Both lost their children to bullying scofflaws.

Both were denied the help they so desperately needed, whether it be Legal Aid or help from Social Services.It is unfair, however to try to portray Angela as somehow stronger and braver than Louise, as your post implies.

It is now known that Louise had no choice in her decision to drop her custody case as she was denied Legal Aid, and is left with a hefty legal bill to pay in Pakistan. Remember too, that she was up against not only Sajad Rana, but her three older children, who were unspeakably cruel towards their mother in public, and her main crime in their eyes seemed to be that she was no longer a Muslim. Sajad Rana and his (influenced) offspring have been grinding this poor soul down for years, not just the past six months.

These women deserved all the help and support our public services could throw at them, and the sheer apathy shown towards them and the fate of these kids, UK nationals, is a disgrace.
11:23 AM"

Emily's Dad said...
Angela - I agree with you entirely, I am not in any shape or form attempting to portray Louise as weaker nor Angela as stronger, the effect on parents who are left behind is devastating in a way that only those who experience it can truly understand.

One point I do make however, is that the trauma for fathers is exactly the same as for a mother - there is no difference. Parents who are placed in this situation need help and support and this matter is of such low priority that it is not available to British parents whose children are taken abroad.You obviously know a great deal regarding Louise Campbell and her personal situation with her ex-husband, and I would like to help.

Kindly contact me at KarlHindle@aol.com."

Tech Tags: Hague+Convention international+child+abduction Judicial+Protocol Louise Molly Campbell Misbah+Rana Angela+Jackson UK/Pakistan

Renfrewshire Social Services & Frederick & Angela Jackson

This is a little off the wall but I thought I should hello to all my new visitors at Renfrewshire Social Services in Scotland.

I reported in November last year the recovery of two children from the United States by their Scottish mother, Angela Jackson after a three year search and legal fight. Unlike Molly Campbell/Misbah Rana's mother, Ms Jackson managed to deal with the emotional trauma of having your children taken and though it has taken it's physical and emotional toil on Angela, she never gave in.

So what I am going to report now causes me a great deal of personal disturbance about how the United Kingdom handles international child abduction cases.

I do hope that you find what you are looking for, however I understand as you are conducting such a very intensive investigation using my site that perhaps you will also be acting as diligently and energetically in obtaining the criminal and arrest records of Mr Frederick "Boom Boom" Jackson together with the US Social Services records concerning his two sons while they were abducted to the United States by him.

I'm particularly concerned at the claims that one of the children attempted suicide in the US, while Mr Jackson has a history of domestic violence - and yes, I am perfectly aware of the level of false allegations that are made in such cases but I understand that they come from his stepdaughter (now fortunately also back in Scotland).

I also have first hand evidence to provide in the matter of Jackson-v-Jackson, including testimony with regards to Mr Jackson's efforts to extort monies from his ex wife while in the US using the children.

I will also be testifying to the threats issued against myself and family by Mr Frederick "Boom Boom" Jackson of Mansfield Port, Texas.

It would appear that Sir Humphrey Appleby was entirely correct in his assertion that social services expand in response to the problems they create.

So why Renfrewshire Social Services has denied Ms Jackson and her sons the support they so desperately required while violating and acting in contempt of a Hague Convention order issued by Judge Migdalia Lopez demonstrates that here in the UK we have much progress to make in international child abduction matters.

The Hague Convention order is binding on the United Kingdom (and Scotland is still part of the Union) while the court order states very clearly that the children be given into the care of Ms Jackson, returned to Scotland and that this order shall remain in force until cancelled or modified by a Scottish court.

Allowing Boom Boom Jackson contact with his sons is right and proper, but now denying contact with Ms Jackson is inhumane and quite beggars belief. Ms Jackson and the children have been through an extraordinary ordeal, one which Molly Campbell/Misbah Rana's mother could not endure for 6 months yet Angela Jackson has fought for over 4 years and against outstanding odds managed to recover two abducted children, and the response of Renfrewshire Social Services...........shameful.

Tech Tags: Angela+Jackson Fred+Jackson international+child+abduction Louise Misbah+Rana Molly+Campbell Renfrewshire Social+Services

Merry Christmas and a Happy New Year !

For Emily we wish you a Merry Christmas and a Happy New Year darling
All our love from Daddy, Max & Dizzy xxx

Tech Tags: Dad Emily+Rose Happy+Christmas New+Year

Louis Nout

Three years ago, I found myself in DeLand Florida in my efforts to resolve the issues surrounding Emily.

I found there a sleepy town halfway between Orlando and Daytona, and many people who took me in and gave me friendship, good company and a reason to visit again and again - DeLand has become my second home.

Louis was the grouchy general manager of my "local" - The Brickhouse on Woodland Boulevard - he taught me how to play dice for "Hoops", made excellent food and split my sides with his dry wit.

I cried when one of the "regulars" emailed me with the horrible news that Loius had been shot and killed by a scumbag, Joseph Vincent Attardo of Deltona, who had discharged a weapon into a crowd and the shot hit Louis in the chest.




Stray bullet kills DeLand restaurateur; suspect charged

Police: Shooting victim not target

Slain cafe worker loved area

Community Outraged Over Shooting Death

Joseph Vincent Attardo charged with manslaughter



Louis Nout

Funeral service for Louis Nout, 39, West Rich Avenue, DeLand, who died Sat., Nov. 25, 2006, at Florida Hospital DeLand, will be 10 a.m. Mon., Dec. 4, at St. Peter's Catholic Church with the Rev. Tom Connery officiating. Burial will be at DeLand Memorial Gardens. Calling hours are from 6 p.m. until 8 p.m. Sunday at Lankford Funeral Home, 220 E. New York Ave. Mr. Nout was born in Holland and came here in 1996 from the Florida Keys. He was a member of Mainstreet DeLand Association, and helped with the Dutton House Restoration. He attended St. Peter's Catholic Church, where he helped with Octoberfest. He also helped with the DeLand Fall Festival of the Arts. Survivors include two brothers and one sister, all of Holland, and many dear friends in DeLand. Memorial donations suggested to The Louis Nout Fund, c/o Mainstreet Community Bank, 204 S. Woodland Blvd., DeLand, FL 32720. Lankford Funeral Home, DeLand, is in charge of arrangements.

The stinking cowardly piece of excrement that shot Louis is now out on bail within 48 hours of taking Louis' life.

Tech Tags: Brickhouse Daytona DeLand Florida Joseph+Attardo Louis+Nout Orlando