Exercising Self-Help in Custody Cases

    Kathleen Aubain is in the Oneida County Jail in New York for violating a court order.  Aubain has a two and a half year old daughter, Isabellah Rose Campos with Eric Campos.  All three were living in Arizona.  Campos has custody of Isabellah. Aubain’s mother says the only reason Campos has custody is because Aubain didn’t bring Isabellah back to him at the end of her custodial time.

    Aubain then left the state of Arizona and fled, with Isabellah, to Utica, New York.  She didn’t have permission to leave Arizona.  She has been arrested and is currently in jail.  She is refusing to tell authorities where Isabellah is or who is caring for her.  Aubain claims that she is protecting Isabellah who she believes is being abused by Campos.  The Arizona social worker determined that the police investigator who examined Isabellah found the bruising to be consistent with Campos’ account that the child’s five-point safety harness used while riding a Rhino vehicle on rough terrain in the desert caused the bruising. 


http://www.wktv.com/news/local/Mother-still-refuses-to-disclose-Arizona-toddlers-whereabouts-270534811.html

    I have said it before.  Do not exercise self help.  Do not defy a court order.  If you feel like there is something happening, such as abuse, notify the proper authorities, and make a request through the court.  Exercising self help is a good way to lose custody.

Interference with Child Custody

  Maria Jose Carrascosa, 48, is a native of Spain and lived in Fort Lee, New Jersey. She had a child, a daughter, with Peter Innes while in New Jersey and the couple separated in 2004.  They signed a parenting agreement prohibiting either parent from taking the child out of the country without the consent of the other.  In 2005, while custody was still unresolved, Carrascosa took the child, then 4, to Spain.

    In 2006, the New Jersey Court ordered the child returned, but Carroscosa refused.  Carrascosa returned to New Jersey and was promptly arrested for contempt.  She has been in jail for the last five years.  The child, now 14, is still in Spain and has not been returned.

    Carroscosa was sentenced to 14 years in 2009, after being convicted of interference with custody.  She has recently been paroled but has not been set free yet.  Innis has not seen his daughter since she has been taken to Spain.  As the article states, until she returns the child to New Jersey, she is still in contempt and she can be placed back into prison. 


http://www.northjersey.com/news/crime-and-courts/mom-released-from-jail-in-custody-case-1.1052854

    When there are court orders regarding custody, make sure to follow them.  When, as Carroscosa did here, one parent makes it difficult/impossible for the other parent to see their children, then this will certainly be taken into account when making future orders.  In California, this type of behavior, whether just restrictive gate-keeping parenting, or whether more extreme like this case, can serve as a basis for a modification or custody orders and even a change of custody entirely.  Judges want to see co-parenting, and in the absence of that, will award custody to the parent that they feel will encourage the relationship between the child and the other parent.  As always, you should consult an experienced family law attorney before making any major decisions regarding the children especially those that will impact the custodial time of the other parent. 

International Child Custody and Child Abduction: Who Are The "Good Guy" and "Bad Guy" Countries? The Most Recent Hague Convention Report

The most recent State Department Report on Compliance with the Hague Convention on the Civil Aspects of International Child Abduction shows that even those countries which have signed off on the Convention do not always comply with it.   Even Western Hemisphere countries, including Costa Rica, Guatemala, and Honduras, are inconsistent in their compliance.  If you're in a dispute over the custody of your children, and the other parent proposes to travel out of the U.S., you should consult an experienced custody attorney in advance;  in this situation, an ounce of prevention may be far less expensive, and better than a ton of cure.  A hat tip to international custody guru Jeremy Morley for the pointer.

Why "Self Help" In Child Custody Cases Is a Bad Idea

    Kelly Cooney, 35 of Lee’s Summit, Missouri has been charged, in Iowa with conspiracy to commit first degree burglary, conspiracy to go armed with intent, and child endangerment.  Kevin Carter, 50, from Raytown, Missouri has also been charged, in Iowa, with first degree burglary, going armed with intent, assault while causing serious injury and carrying weapons.

    Apparently, Cooney and Carter broke into the house of Cooney’s son’s father.  Carter used a stun gun on the father while he was holding the child and Cooney took the child from the father.  Cooney and Carter attempted to flee with the child.  The ex-husband of a neighbor saw what happened and had a valid weapon permit.  He retrieved his gun and fired several shots to deflate the tires of the Cooney and Carter’s vehicle.

    Cooney and Carter are being held in Boone County Jail in Iowa.

    There are some reported custody issues between Cooney and the boy’s father.  It is unclear whether there are existing orders, or whether there are legal proceedings in Missouri or Iowa. 

http://www.lsjournal.com/2014/04/16/114117/lees-summit-woman-arrested-in.html

    There are limited, if any, instances in which exercising self help in a family law matter is appropriate.  Even if one party may not be doing anything technically against any rules, self help typically implies a lack of communication and cooperation.  Using the example from above, even though it’s an extreme one, let’s assume there were no custody orders in place and there wasn’t even a case filed.  It would be true that the father had no more custodial rights to the child than Cooney.  Even if she is a perfectly competent mother, she would be hard pressed to find a judge that would be able to overlook the facts (assuming they are true), that she broke into the house, used a stun gun on the child's father, then tried to forcibly remove the child from the father.  At this point, she may be hard pressed to find a judge that will give her anything other than monitored visitation with her child, and that’s after she’s released from jail.

Recovery under the Hague Convention

Christian Nørgaard, a Danish computer science engineer was working in California when he met and married Tammy Zied, a software engineer. They married in Redwood City, California and had two daughters, Mia and Sarah, both born in California. The family moved to Germany then Denmark for Christian’s employment. 

While living in Denmark, the couple separated and in 2012, the Danish courts granted sole custody of both children to Christian. Tammy accused Christian of violence against her and the daughters. Mia began running away from Christian’s home, according to Tammy, to "escape the violence". Last May, Mia arrived in the United States and Sarah was left in Denmark with Christian. It is unclear whether Mia came to the United States with permission of Christian and was never returned, or whether Mia went to the United States without the consent of Christian and against the court order. 

According to an article published in the Copenhagen Post in August 19, 2013, Mia was reported as kidnapped to Interpol after Tammy failed to return her to Christian after an Easter visit. Tammy had told the police that Mia had run away and she didn’t know where she was. Police suspected that Tammy was hiding Mia and held her in custody for five days. When she was released, Tammy disappeared. 
 http://cphpost.dk/news/american-mother-suspected-of-kidnapping-her-daughter.6461.html

Mia and Tammy were living in Laguna Niguel. On January 31, 2014, the local authorities took Mia to a youth facility. Christian returned to California and Mia was returned to him a few days later. It appears that Mia is now with Christian and Sarah in Denmark.

Christian filed a Petition in Orange County under the Hague Convention and received assistance from the United States in the return of Mia to his custody. 

http://www.ocregister.com/articles/mia-604827-denmark-danish.html

Generally, exercising self-help in custody cases is not a good option. If faced with a similar situation or if you don't like the orders that are in place, the remedy would be to petition the court that made the orders, in this case Denmark, for a modification. Orders are binding and disobeying a court order or using self-help will make it more difficult to obtain custody or visitation in the future.

Believe Half of What You See*: The "Skier's Fetus Custody Case", And Other Internet Rumors

To say that the Uniform Child Custody Jurisdiction and Enforcement Act   (UCCJEA) isn't usually the stuff of the internet tabloids, and the "entertainment news" shows and sites is an understatement.   So when it does make an appearance,  it's frankly not horribly surprising when the tabloids, reputable online news outlets, and even the "Grey Lady" of American news media, don't get the details exactly right.

The short version of the story (and I haven't read the full trial court record either in New York or in California) seems to be that in May, a New York judicial officer made an odd, and fairly clearly wrong-headed decision on the issue of custody jurisdiction, kicking the case back to California.  A judge in California, faced with an apparent "we don't want it!" from the New York court, then decided to act, since, at that point, no other court was willing to do so.  Several months later, the appellate court in New York, in what is characterized as a "scathing" opinion, reversed the New York trial court's mistake.

Is any of this really news?   Judges (and other judicial officers) sometimes make wrong decisions.  Sometimes, they even make stupidly wrong decisions.  That's what the appellate process is about.






*"People say believe half of what you see, and none of what you hear."   Norman Whitfield and Barrett Strong:   Heard It Through the Grapevine

Choose your Monitor Wisely!

A Maine woman is charged with endangering the life of a child in a child abduction case. Jennifer Dore from Maine was supervising a visit between BethMarie Retamozzo and her children last month. Retamozzo drove away with the children and was lost in traffic. Dore did not report the incident to the authorities and spoke with them more than five hours later when the police contacted her. 

The children were reported missing by their grandmother on August 15. Retamozzo and the children were found more than 1,100 miles away sleeping in their car at a rest stop on Interstate 95 in South Carolina. The police went to South Carolina and returned the children to Maine on August 26.

Dore was not a professional monitor, she was an acquaintance of the family and was selected by the parties to monitor the visits. She was not paid for her services. She is scheduled to appear in court on November 5.

http://www.pressherald.com/news/child-visitation-supervisor-charged-in-abduction-case_2013-08-29.html

In California, you also have an option to select a non-professional monitor to supervise visits. There can be a number of benefits in selecting a family friend or relative to monitor visits: it’s cheaper, there can more flexibility in time and locations of visits, the children may be more at ease in front of people they already know just to name a few. That said, be careful in selecting a monitor. If supervised visits are appropriate, then there are concerns about the children’s safety while with that parent. In selecting a monitor, the person must be someone you trust and that will protect the children, even if that requires preventing the supervised parent from doing or not doing something. Especially with family friends and/or relatives of the supervised parent, this can be difficult to do since they may feel loyalty to that parent. 

Being a monitor is a big responsibility and it’s important that you explain their duties and responsibilities. If they are unwilling to perform those duties, then you’re better off selecting a different monitor or paying a professional monitor.

Child Abduction in Custody Disputes

The number of child abduction cases that involve a child custody dispute has increased from 9% in 2009 to 50% in 2012.  The cases included in these statistics are those where a non-custodial parent takes a child(ren) from the custodial parent against the will of the child(ren) or custodial parent. Sometimes the motivation might be to retaliate against the custodial parent, sometimes it’s an effort to reconcile. Apparently, children under the age of three are at the greatest risk of being taken by a non-custodial parent against their or the custodial parent's will.

Early reporting of an abduction to the proper authorities will minimize the likelihood of harm to the child. If there is a history or domestic violence or threats of taking the child(ren), perhaps restraining orders or restricted and/or monitored visitation is appropriate. There are additional steps to reduce the chance of custodial issues or potential abduction or harm to the child(ren) such as always keeping a copy of the entered order at all times, dropping a copy of it off at all the schools, the local police station, and the day care or any other place the children spend time.