FIRST and FOREMOST:
We wish to thank God and the
U.S. Department of State:
* Specifically, Special Agent in Charge (SAC) George Nutwell & Senior Special Agent Rick Higbie with the U.S. Department of State's Bureau of Diplomatic Security, and Susan Jacobs, Special Advisor to the Department of State's 'Office of Children's Issues' for their committed efforts to bring Alessia home, and to all who have helped implement the Alessia Child Abduction Prevention Act that will hopefully be attached to the 2013 Immigration Bill.
Despite letters from the U.S. Department of State and Global Missing Children Fund, a UK judge blocked American Bart Hermer's evidence in violation of Article 30 of the Hague Convention. Another UK judge violated Hermer's rights of Due Process and International Law when he arbitrarily refused to allow the American parent the right to appeal with fresh evidence "to confirm the foreign judgment had been procured by fraud."
* The Foreign court violated Articles 30, 1, 3, 5, 11, 12, 14, 16 & 19 of the 1980 Hague Convention on the Civil Aspects of Internationally Abducted Children;
A Treaty ratified to 'protect' the international abduction of children.
(1) HAGUE CONFERENCE ON INTERNATIONAL LAW
Due to the alarming increase in international child abductions and the fact that each country has a different legal system and culture, the Hague Conference on International Law drafted a 'multi-lateral' treaty called the 'Hague Convention on the Civil Aspects of International Child Abduction' (Hague Abduction Convention). As of May 2013, 89 Countries have ratified the 45 Articles of the Hague Abduction Convention into sovereign law to stop parents from abducting children to other countries in search of more favorable forum. The Hague's Abduction Convention seeks to combat this problem by providing a 'unified' system of legal obligations within the 45 Articles of the Convention and to immediately return abducted children to the country of their prior habitual residence. All countries have unanimously determined: (1) International Parental Kidnappings have short & long term affects that are "harmful to the child's well-being"; (2) that their wrongful removal or retention across international boundaries "is not in the best interest of the child", and (3) that only the return of the child to the Country of their prior habitual residence, "promotes their best interest by vindicating the right of children to have contact with both parents, and ultimately (4) "to deprive the wrongful parent of any advantage that might otherwise be gained by the abduction."
(2) THE U.N.CONVENTION ON RIGHTS OF A CHILD
In further efforts to protect children around the world, the United Nations drafted the 'U.N. Convention on the Rights of a Child' (the UNCRC). The UN General Assembly adopted this Convention and opened it for signature November 20, 1989. Nations that ratify this convention are bound to it by International Law.
The Preamble of the UNCRC firmly declares: "Recognizing the child, for the full and harmonious development of his or her personality, should grow up in a family environment, in an atmosphere of happiness, love & understanding."
UNCRC Article 9.3 stated : "States Parties shall respect the right of the child who is separated from one or both parents to maintain personal relations and direct contact with both parents on a regular basis, except if contrary to the child’s best interests."
UNCRC Article 11 states: "1. States Parties shall take measures to combat the illicit transfer and non-return of children abroad. 2. To this end, States Parties shall promote the conclusion of bilateral or multilateral agreements or accession to existing agreements."
(3) CONGRESS DECLARED: "International Parental Kidnappings are increasing and 'harmful to a child's well-being.' As a result, three bills were enacted since the Hague Convention " to send a clear 'worldwide' message the U.S. Government will [NOT] tolerate the abduction or retention of American children under [ANY] circumstances."
[See H.R. Rep. No. 103–390 (1993) ].
(4) CONGRESS ENACTED: the International Parental Kidnapping Crime Act in 1993 (U.S. CODE 18 § 1204). 'IPKCA' now makes it a Federal Felony to wrongfully remove or [retain] a child under 16 from the United States.
(5) PROTEST LETTERS were submitted on behalf of the Texas child (to no avail) by both the U.S. Department of State and England's own 'International Child Abduction Unit,' followed by a third letter from the Chairman of the Global Missing Children’s Fund, each of whom addressed the United State's concern for a 10-month delay in violation of Article 11 of the Convention and for blocking CRITICAL evidence attached to the American father’s Hague Application in violation of Article 30 of the Hague Convention - which clearly states that such evidence "[shall] be admitted.” (See all three Letters submitted below).
(6) NATIONAL CENTER FOR MISSING & EXPLOITED CHILDREN - An attorney for 'NCMEC' submitted an Affidavit "on behalf of Alessia" to illustrate challenges of returning children abducted from the United States to the United Kingdom. NCMEC's Affidavit specifically states the following:
“in (92%) of active unresolved cases involving U.S. Children taken to the [United Kingdom], we have been seeking return of our children for one year or longer; and (38%) remain unresolved for five years or longer.” When the Hague Convention failed to return American children, NCMEC declared that "(14%) of closed cases were recovered through Law Enforcement action between the US & the UK.” The result the U.S. & Alessia's father now pursues.
Letters submitted by U.S. Department of State & UK Child Abduction Unit
Letter submitted by Global Missing Children Fund Letter
Hague Convention Article 30
According to latest reports submitted to Congress by the U.S. Department of Justice: '203,900 American Children are abducted each year by a parent - and those numbers are increasing.'
The Media is our children's biggest hope and in many cases their only hope. Media raises public awareness to hold countries and politicians accountable to protect our nations most valuable resource - OUR CHILDREN.
CLICK HERE FOR QUICK VIDEO ON INTERNATIONAL CHILD ABDUCTION
BREAKING NEWS: (FOLO)
Dallas, Texas: Monday, August 19, 2013: Finally, the 4 year legal battle for this Texas Father and his little girl, Alessia, came to an end. U.S. Courts 'declined to recognize' a UK Order shown to have been procured by fraud and in violation of an International Treaty. After hearing over 70 pages of evidence corroborated by the U.S. Department of State, Texas Police, FBI, two Texas Senators, a member of the House of Representatives, the Department of Health, several TX retailers and the child's clinic; the judge found evidence that 'irrefutably' confirmed a conspiracy to kidnap the child from her Texas home and ORDERED the American child returned to the UNITED STATES pursuant to the 'Hague Convention on the Civil Aspects of International Child Abduction' no later than 5:00 PM Central on August 26, 2013. U.S. Court Orders specifically stated:
1) " The Court finds that, pursuant to the Hague Convention on the Civil Aspects of International Child Abduction, that the UNITED STATES OF AMERICA is the Habitual Residence of the Child, ALESSIA SOFIA COHEN-HERMER."
2) "The Court, after examining the record and evidence and argument of counsel, finds that it has jurisdiction of this case and of all parties and that no other court has continuing, exclusive jurisdiction of this case."
3) "IT IS ORDERED that SIMMONE JAYNE COHEN [shall] deliver the child to BARTON JEANOT HERMER, Sole managing Conservator of the child no later than 5:00 p.m. Central Standard Time on August 26, 2013."
Attorneys tell local newspapers: “now we will need the media, our politicians and the State Department to work through every political channel to bring the child home.”
Copy of 'Offer of Proof' Confirming Conspiracy, filed in Texas
Copy of U.S. Orders to Return the American Child
The UK also Pursues Children Abducted from Their Country
The UK will Extradite Parents Who Abduct Children
Thursday, October 4, 2012 - Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals unanimously reversed & remanded a Texas Court for prematurely giving full faith and credit to a foreign judgment alleged to have been procured by fraud, without giving him an opportunity to be heard or permission to appeal. The foreign judgment refused to allow Bart Hermer (or the U.S. Department of State) to submit 'critical' evidence pursuant to Article 30 of the Hague Convention's Treaty on the 'Civil Aspects of International Child Abduction' - evidence which now confirms that the foreign judgment had been procured by fraud as well as a conspiracy to kidnap the child by the U.S. Department of State, FBI, Texas Police, U.S. Department of Health, Texas Senators and U.S. Immigration authorities.
Instead, the British judge arbitrarily called the American 'a fantasist not living in reality' and refused to return the child to the United States.
After refusing to return the American child pursuant to the International Treaty, the foreign court further breached the American father's Constitutional right of Due Process and the Europe Union's Human Rights Act for a 'fair & impartial trial' when it refused to grant the child's father 'permission' to appeal the foreign judgment on grounds it had been procured by fraud and that the trial court breached Article 30 of the Hague Convention. The British judge refused to allow the American to adduce any evidence to prove the foreign judgment had been procured by fraud and then further denied his request for 'permission' to appeal to any British appellate court.
By blocking the American Father's evidence and refusing the written requests of the Department of State & Global Missing Children Fund, the Father did not have the benefit of a [fair] adversarial proceeding, as the Father was unable at various stages of the proceedings to adduce arguments and evidence considered relevant to the case within terms of Articles 30, 23, and 8(g)(f) of the 1980 Hague Convention.
Additionally, Alessia’s Father did not have [fair] opportunity to effectively challenge egregious arguments and evidence (erroneously) adduced by the opposing party with all of the reliable and available evidence. All of his evidence, which should have been viewed objectively and was relevant to the resolution of Alessia’s abduction, was not duly heard and was not examined by the Court. Therefore any 'alleged' factual reasons for the foreign judge's decision (now proven false) were NOT arrived at fairly and/or impartially.
Unlike the United States, where parties have a Constitutional right to appeal to a panel of no less than THREE judges to ensure an impartial tribunal, a litigant in the U.K. must first ASK ‘permission’ (from a single judge) to appeal to a Higher Court. This British judge refused the American’s request for 'permission' to appeal AND further issued ORDERS refusing to allow the American to adduce any evidence to prove the procurement of fraud. Bart Hermer then pleaded to the judge for permission to appeal to the House of Lords (England’s Supreme Court) but the same judge again refused to grant his request.
If either the trial judge or an appellate body had reviewed this evidence to show the procurement of fraud and the conspiracy to kidnap Alessia, it would’ve had a direct impact on this case. To deny the Father the right to appeal on grounds of fraud violated even the most fundamental principles of Due Process and natural justice.
"Newly Discovered Evidence"...
"corroborated by the U.S. Department of State, the U.S. Office of Children’s Issues, FBI, the Department of Health & Human Services, and Plano Police Department 'confirms' conspiracy to kidnap the child, to deceive the Petitioner and not return the child to the United States." Therefore, the foreign judgment is subject to non-recognition: "The United States is entitled to exercise jurisdiction over the Child, as her entry into, her remaining in, and her jurisdiction in the United Kingdom were perpetrated by 'Unjustifiable Conduct'."
U.S. LAW ON FOREIGN JUDGMENTS
“A court of this State need [not] apply this Chapter if the child custody law of the ‘foreign’ country is [not] made under ‘FACTUAL CIRCUMSTANCES’ and in conformity with the UCCJEA or violates the fundamental principles of human rights.” TX FAMILY CODE §152.105(b)(c): The Uniform Child Custody Jurisdiction and Enforcement Act (UCCJEA).
U.S. LAW ON A CHILD'S JURISDICTION
“Home-State” means the State in which, immediately preceding the time involved, the child lived with his parents, a parent, or a person acting as parent, for at least six consecutive months, and in the case of a child less than six months old, the State in which the child lived from birth with any of such persons. "Periods of temporary absence of any of such persons are counted as part of the six-month period."
The Parental Kidnapping Prevention Act. 28 U.S.C. § 1738A.
Part of the Department of State’s role as head of the U.S. Foreign Affairs Agency is to protect the welfare of all U.S. citizens abroad (including abducted children) and to seek fair and equal treatment of U.S. citizens abroad (including parents seeking return of their abducted children). The Department of State uses a variety of diplomatic initiatives to protect U.S. citizens abroad. These involve negotiations & obligatory commitments of International Conventions & Treaties and (whenever necessary) direct enforcement actions in specific cases. These direct actions include diplomatic intervention at the highest levels, and/or less formal communications such as the exchange of letters. As noted above, the established mechanism for internationally abducted children begins with a "diplomatic-civil-action" through the Hague Convention Treaty BUT the United States will NOT recognize Foreign Judgments obtained by fraud, or run contrary to the purpose & objectives of the Convention, violate Due Process to U.S. citizens and/or threaten our Human Rights & Civil Liberties.