4 girls dragged kicking/screaming onto aircraft after Australian judge rules they return to father

page: 1
14
<<   2  3  4 >>

log in

join

posted on Oct, 4 2012 @ 04:04 AM
link   
• Custody on fours sisters aged between 9 and 15, had been awarded to the Italian father
• They were brought to Australia on a holiday two years ago by their mother from Italy for a holiday two years ago – and then kept them in the country.
• Judge in Australia ordered that the girls must go back to Italy

An Italian father has been forced to fight a long legal battle to enforce his custody of his four daughters after their Australian mother took them on holiday and then refused to return them even after an Australian court ordered her to do so.


For weeks the girls, who have joint Australian and Italian citizenship, had remained in hiding with their great-grandmother after a court ordered they should be returned to their father in Italy.

The father had insisted in court battles that the children should be returned to Italy under the provisions of the Hague Convention, an international treaty against child abduction.

Justice Colin Forrest found in the Australian Family Court last year that while he did not absolutely accept ‘the truthfulness of all of the evidence deposed to by the father’, he was satisfied the father did not consent to the children’s relocation.

Daily Mail


It was reported that the children were upset to be separated from their mother, while many Australians have expressed anger at the decision by the Australian court.


Up to a dozen federal officers in suits were present as the four sisters were dragged to an airport lounge to await boarding on an Emirates flight, but they were determined not to go without a fight.

‘Let me go, I want my mum, I want my mum,’ one of the younger girls – they cannot be identified because they are minors – cried as federal officers held onto her arms.

All girls cried out to their escorts to let them return to their home in Australia and complained the officers were hurting their arms.



Daily Mail


Despite what some Australians may feel, the court has done the correct thing in sending the children home to their father. Their interests are paramount and the original divorce court determined that the children's interests were better served with their father, an unusual decision, which reflects badly on the mother, in light of the huge bias divorce courts have towards awarding custody to mothers.

It should also be borne in mind that if the situation was reversed, the Australian media would paint the Italian father as a villain, with it crying out for Italy to return the children to their mother.

The mother has caused this unfortunate situation, with the victims being the children.

I hope she is prosecuted. No doubt a father would be.

edit on 4-10-2012 by ollncasino because: (no reason given)
edit on Thu Oct 4 2012 by DontTreadOnMe because: IMPORTANT: Using Content From Other Websites on ATS




posted on Oct, 4 2012 @ 04:16 AM
link   
There is a bit more to this than just a judge ordering them to head back to Italy to be with their father. The father has been accused of being a violent person and I think that the mother also feared for the lives of her daughters if they were sent.

I know this article was from earlier on in the year but it explains why the girls want to stay in Australia.


They say they fear for their safety and wellbeing if returned with their father, whom they described as physically abusive and a workaholic.

The eldest daughter, 14, said her father had broken her thumb when she tried to protect her head during a beating.

"I don't want to go. He was very violent when we were living in Italy," she said.


And just a bit more from one of the younger daughters


Her 13-year-old sister, told the paper: "I don't want to go back either. "I remember when I was little he'd hit us, and I remember when he hit my Mum."

However, a legal appeal by the girls and their mother to overturn the Family Court decision to repatriate them was rejected and an order issued for their repatriation.


So I don't know whether Australia has done the right thing or not. Obviously the father has the right to see his daughters but by what the daughters say, they don't really want much to do with him and would rather stay in Australia..

www.globalpost.com...



posted on Oct, 4 2012 @ 04:18 AM
link   
reply to post by ollncasino
 


Although I agree that the law is the law, this, like many other instances is upsetting because the girls are the ones copping the brunt of their parents inability to resolve their differences and hence be separated.

Once again the children suffer the most- and in this particular case they will live with the trauma of Mum & Dad not getting along even more so (than the textbook break-up) for the rest of their lives.

S&F
edit on 4-10-2012 by Sublimecraft because: (no reason given)



posted on Oct, 4 2012 @ 04:21 AM
link   

Originally posted by DarknStormy

There is a bit more to this than just a judge ordering them to head back to Italy to be with their father. The father has been accused of being a violent person and I think that the mother also feared for the lives of her daughters if they were sent.


Yet the original court, which was in possession of more facts and evidence than you or I, decided that the children's interests were served best by the father having custody.

Incidentally, if the father really was a violent person who had struck their mother, why did the original court come to the decision that it did?

It is easy to make accusations. It is also easy to brainwash children.

The mother has caused this unfortunate mess and I hope she is punished. A man would be.

edit on 4-10-2012 by ollncasino because: (no reason given)



posted on Oct, 4 2012 @ 04:26 AM
link   

Originally posted by Sublimecraft

Although I agree that the law is the law, this, like many other instances is upsetting because the girls are the ones copping the brunt of their parents inability to resolve their differences and hence be separated.

Once again the children suffer the most


It is the children who suffer however it could be pointed out that its not the parents who can't resolve their differences, it is the mother who took the children on holiday and then refused to return them, in contravention of the original divorce court's decision that awarded the father custody.

While the mother's selfishness is understandable, she has put her own interests before that of her children.



posted on Oct, 4 2012 @ 04:29 AM
link   
reply to post by ollncasino
 


Agreed - I have been following this case since its inception - the old man has been made out to look like the Ogre which, as you have stated above, the courts have certainly disagreed with - given the evidence presented that you or I are not privy to.

Mum has certainly taken advantage of the "sentiment" of the Aussie community - even dragging her grandmother into it all!


+2 more 
posted on Oct, 4 2012 @ 04:32 AM
link   

Originally posted by ollncasino

Originally posted by Sublimecraft

Although I agree that the law is the law, this, like many other instances is upsetting because the girls are the ones copping the brunt of their parents inability to resolve their differences and hence be separated.

Once again the children suffer the most


While the mother's selfishness is understandable, she has put her own interests before that of her children.


in view of his apparent aggression i'd say she's putting the interests of her children first. and given they are all old enough to be consulted in the matter i think this is a disgusting state of affairs.



posted on Oct, 4 2012 @ 04:43 AM
link   
reply to post by ollncasino
 


Its not that I agree or disagree with the decision. I just thought I would throw that in also as it has been a big part of the story here whether the girls have been manipulated or not. Fair enough the mother has thought about herself before anyone else, but at the same time, its pretty sad if they are telling the truth and now the girls have to live with violence in Italy for the rest of their lives.

Either way, it doesn't worry me, unless my ex decides taking my children back to her homeland England is on the cards.



posted on Oct, 4 2012 @ 04:48 AM
link   
Regardless of what parent is in the right here... I think the desires of the children should be the ruling factor here. If they want to be with their mother then they should be allowed to stay with their mother. I don't really think it's right to force them to travel back to another country against their will.



posted on Oct, 4 2012 @ 04:51 AM
link   
reply to post by ChaoticOrder
 


That's where you are wrong. Manipulation..........if I was a kid in their situation, I'd go to the parent who never disciplined me, gave me whatever I want, and spoiled me silly. There must be a good reason why they gave custody to the father. I wonder what it is. Most cases of custody, the father is rarely awarded.

One parent can just teach their kids to hate another parent. It happens all the time
edit on 4-10-2012 by Svipdagr because: (no reason given)



posted on Oct, 4 2012 @ 04:58 AM
link   

Originally posted by ladyteeny
in view of his apparent aggression i'd say she's putting the interests of her children first. and given they are all old enough to be consulted in the matter i think this is a disgusting state of affairs.


In view of his alleged aggression.

It is interesting that the mother was not awarded custody originally if these allegations of aggression had any basis in fact.

One must presume that they most likely do not.



posted on Oct, 4 2012 @ 04:58 AM
link   
reply to post by Svipdagr
 


Yeah I think this would all be much clearer if we knew exactly why the father was awarded custody... if there even is a valid reason.

But honestly I have an extremely hard time buying the manipulation line... anything could be considered "manipulation". Her kids clearly love her... if she does anything to make them love her is that considered manipulation?

Maybe she lies and tells them their father is a cruel violent man when he really isn't... but that still doesn't justify why they should be taken from their mother. A lot of women talk trash about their ex's, and it doesn't invalidate the love her children feel for her.

At the end of the day the children know what they really want. Ask them and let them decide who is the better parent... don't force them to do things against their will, especially when that thing is being shipped off to another country to live with a parent they hardly know.



posted on Oct, 4 2012 @ 05:04 AM
link   
Upon reading the article, it's clear the actual reason he was awarded custody was because when the mother ran off to Australia with the children it was considered child abduction under the Hague Convention. He was arguing his case based on the laws under that Convention, and it seems the court ruled in his favor. The article is exactly right when it says "all this was happening because of the law.".
edit on 4/10/2012 by ChaoticOrder because: (no reason given)



posted on Oct, 4 2012 @ 05:06 AM
link   

Originally posted by ChaoticOrder
Regardless of what parent is in the right here... I think the desires of the children should be the ruling factor here. If they want to be with their mother then they should be allowed to stay with their mother. I don't really think it's right to force them to travel back to another country against their will.


After spending 2 years with there mother after she abducted them, it could be argued that it would be surprising if they did not express a wish to stay with their mother.

Incidentally, if a father abducts his children and refuses to return them to their mother, would that be grounds for the father to contest custody?

I don't imagine it would be. More likely he would be arrested and end up in prison.

Only if a case is reopened would the children's preferences be one factor that would be taken into account. The opportunity for the mother to have influenced the children's perception of their father would also be considered.



posted on Oct, 4 2012 @ 05:11 AM
link   
reply to post by ollncasino
 



After spending 2 years with there mother after she abducted them, it could be argued that it would be surprising if they did not express a wish to stay with their mother.

You are of course correct, but that's just the way things worked out. It can't be helped, the children will love who they will, and that can't be changed now. And so we need to keep in mind what is best for these children on an emotional level and mental health level. Abrupt family disruptions like this in their early life can lead to serious problems later.



posted on Oct, 4 2012 @ 05:15 AM
link   

Originally posted by ChaoticOrder

Maybe she lies and tells them their father is a cruel violent man when he really isn't... but that still doesn't justify why they should be taken from their mother.


Yet she took the children from their father in contravention of the original court order which awarded him custody. How is that justified?


Originally posted by ChaoticOrder
At the end of the day the children know what they really want. Ask them and let them decide who is the better parent... don't force them to do things against their will, especially when that thing is being shipped off to another country to live with a parent they hardly know.


Quite possibly they were asked in the original family court.

Incidentally, they hold both Italian and Australian passports and, while I don't posses all of the facts, it was the mother who took the children on holiday to Australia and refused to return them to their Italian father, so it could be argued that it was the mother that shipped the children to another country to live with a parent they hardly knew.



posted on Oct, 4 2012 @ 05:17 AM
link   
reply to post by ChaoticOrder
 


They're children though. They'll believe anything. I'll tell you about a friend of mine. Mother and father get divorced (mother cheated), she lied to the courts and took everything. She told my friend all the time that their father left for another woman, that he took away all the money, etc. Telling him lies, my friend hated his father, didn't want anyone to mention him or anything...just because of what his mother said. Sure, his mom treated him nice and all, but his mother's selfishness ruined a relationship he could've had with his father.

In the end, turns out, his dad never cheated or did anything to hurt the family. He sent letters all the time (taken away by mother). And he died of cancer.....how's that for manipulation?



posted on Oct, 4 2012 @ 05:18 AM
link   

Originally posted by ChaoticOrder
You are of course correct, but that's just the way things worked out. It can't be helped, the children will love who they will, and that can't be changed now.

And so we need to keep in mind what is best for these children on an emotional level and mental health level. Abrupt family disruptions like this in their early life can lead to serious problems later.


They do say that possession is 9/10s of the law, but I am unsure that a parent who abducts children should effectively be rewarded for that abduction.

The mother appears to have been unsuccessful at re-opening the issue of custody in an Australian court. No doubt if she had been, again the children's interests would have been paramount.



posted on Oct, 4 2012 @ 05:19 AM
link   
maybe the "Work-a-holic" father just had more money to hire a better "legal"
representation, the scales of justice always weighs towards the most cash
thrown at the system...



posted on Oct, 4 2012 @ 05:19 AM
link   
reply to post by ChaoticOrder
 


The judge made a direction based on the law.I believe as a father of children the judge made a wise direction.

The father has rights too and the mother disregarded these rights and will learn the lessons she needs to learn

In the long term the children will understand what has transpired





top topics
 
14
<<   2  3  4 >>

log in

join


Haters, Bigots, Partisan Trolls, Propaganda Hacks, Racists, and LOL-tards: Time To Move On.
read more: Community Announcement re: Decorum