Meet the Other Phone. Flexible and made to last.

Meet the Other Phone.
Flexible and made to last.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

News

See all MNHQ comments on this thread

4 sisters returned to Italian father after their Australian Mum took them to Australia.....dragged kicking and screaming onto the plane.

809 replies

AmberLeaf · 05/10/2012 00:59

Apparently the girls aged between 9-15 are dual citizens.

Link sorry its the DM.

Do they not take the childs view into account in Australia?

OP posts:
hannah0000035 · 14/10/2012 11:25

amber, that is a good question in that there seems to be a lot of confusion regarding the interpretation of these legal documents.
the mother ALLEGES domestic violence by affidavit or maybe even by oral submissions during the hearing. the judge then makes his judgement, and then provides reasons why he made the judgement.
So, what you see is the judge referring to the mothers statements that she made during the hearing, nothing else. If there were photos, witnesses - then he would be referring to them and kicking the fathers ass in some way.
It seems to me that he disregards the ( lack of ) evidence/possibility of domestic violence as it does not affect the fathers ability to parent today- even if it indeed did happen, so even if there were photos etc, it wouldnt matter to Forrest J, today now in 2012.
These judges weigh everything up in these matters, and there usually is a ton of allegations that are fake and real and real evidence etc.
i believe the mother wrecked her own case by destroying her credibility, after the judge realised she played games, it was all over for her.

hannah0000035 · 14/10/2012 11:27

amber why do you believe there was domestic violence? because the mother says so?

AmberLeaf · 14/10/2012 11:29

Why do you believe there wasn't?

OP posts:
AmberLeaf · 14/10/2012 11:32

See point .9 under Brief background facts

It says facts not allegations.

OP posts:
hannah0000035 · 14/10/2012 11:32

lol im not making any sense it seems, ok ill come back later bye for now

AmberLeaf · 14/10/2012 11:34

As it is only a 'brief' background to the facts it doesnt go into detail, but it does state fact so I take from that that it has been proven to be more than just an allegation and that judge Forrester must have seen the evidence to back that.

OP posts:
hannah0000035 · 14/10/2012 11:38

amber, you may like to read paragraphs 86-90, note here the girls by this time had well and truly been brainwashed...i dont think it matters what you read by the sounds of it amber. Are you believing what you want to believe?

AmberLeaf · 14/10/2012 11:39

Aww where is everyone now it is there in black and white that there was domestic violence?

I'm waiting for all those who said she was making it all up and that she only started saying it a year ago.

OP posts:
hannah0000035 · 14/10/2012 11:40

paragraphs 86-90 directly relate to point 9 . This is how the reasons for judgement work. Not much gravity was given to the allegations. the use of the word ' fact' is an unfortunate one, but its the one they use on those forms.

AmberLeaf · 14/10/2012 11:40

I have said I accept that she acted illegally.

I will say now that I accept she may have put influence on the children.

BUT why oh why are you choosing to gloss over the fact that there was domestic violence?

Are you believing what you want to believe?

OP posts:
hannah0000035 · 14/10/2012 11:44

amber, you are now filled with excitement ..your point has proven.
but, youre wrong dear.
you believe what you want to and are a classic example of someone
who is blinded by ...well i don't know what makes you tick.
but anyway amber you believe what you want to ok?
I must say im confused by people who are like this but anyway...
the sun will still come up tomorrow im sure.

AmberLeaf · 14/10/2012 11:45

points 86-90

The mother asserts a history of quite serious physical, verbal and emotional abuse at the hands of the father. Counsel for the central authority submits that the evidence really establishes that that is mostly historical, occurring prior to separation in 2007. He further asserts that the father denies the allegations in any event

Ms E?s reporting of the information conveyed to her by the girls provides support for the mother?s evidence that she was subjected to violence prior to separation

I am inclined to accept the mother?s evidence that she was subjected to emotional, verbal and physical violence prior to, and up to the point of, separation in 2007

The mother gives evidence that since separation she has been subject to some harassment and further verbal abuse by the father and even death threats. She does not assert that he has been physically violent to her since she moved away from the villa they shared in early 2007. Of course, there can be no condoning of any ongoing harassment, threats or verbal abuse but the nature of these Hague Convention applications is such that a court in this country has, to a significant degree, accept the capacities of the Courts and the law enforcement agencies of countries, such as Italy from whence these children came, to provide suitable protection and remedies for the mother in such circumstances. Conscious of this, I simply cannot accept the mother?s evidence that the Italian system is such that she cannot get such protection and remedial support

Erm yeah? what is your point? all the above supports the allegations [proven?] of domestic violence.

He was violent prior to their separation.

Harrassment, verbal abuse and death threats since the separation.

He sounds lovely doesn't he.

OP posts:
edam · 14/10/2012 11:47

Good grief, that footage is shocking. Whatever the rights and wrongs of the situation, using force to drag children kicking and screaming away from their mother is horrific. And the children are old enough to have their views be paramount. Does the Australian legal system not agree that the welfare of the child is all-important and the deciding factor?

AmberLeaf · 14/10/2012 11:48

No Hannah, im not 'filled with excitement'

I started this thread over a week ago, I had an opinion then, im surprised to have had it confirmed so quickly and thank you for your link.

No you don't know what makes me 'tick' but rest assured, it takes more than a story in the news about people I dont even know to 'fill me with excitement'

OP posts:
hannah0000035 · 14/10/2012 11:54

" the mother asserts..."
" mr e says the girls said"
" the mother states"....

uh, well yeah thats prime evidence right there.

hannah0000035 · 14/10/2012 11:56

amber i have a real hard time believing one word the mother " states".
you don't.
end of story.

Snorbs · 14/10/2012 12:03

edam, yes it does. But it's also a signatory to the Hague Convention which says that, in cases of child abduction (such as this), the country that has jurisdiction is the country where the children were originally living and that children should be returned to the country they were abducted from. Which in this case is Italy.

hannah0000035 · 14/10/2012 12:05

so my fifteen year olds views are paramount? please....lol are you thinking about what you're typing out?

AmberLeaf · 14/10/2012 12:07

Hannah, are you saying that you 100% disbelieve the allegations of violence [that are stated as FACT in the court document that you linked]

OP posts:
hannah0000035 · 14/10/2012 12:18

amber, paragraphs 86-90 directly relate to point 9, because the judge is " inclined to accept" that the mother is telling the truth about paragraphs 86-90, then it becomes 'fact'..hes a judge and he finds out the ' facts' right?...but...justice forrest didn't see and hear what I saw after the judgement was written...when the mother revealed her true self to the whole world via media. i think she's a scammer and a liar. Judge forrest believed her testimony..kind of. he was " inclined" to.

i don't.

hannah0000035 · 14/10/2012 12:19

my ratio of truth to lies regarding the mother is...15 truth 85 lies.

hannah0000035 · 14/10/2012 12:22

amber, lets say he hit the mother in...2007

do you think the children should be with him right now?

LtEveDallas · 14/10/2012 12:27

Neither Amber or I have said he shouldn't have the children with him right now.

You are falling back on an arguement that has not been stated.

You are sounding rather hectoring now. For what ever reason you are choosing to disbelieve that there was Domestic Violence in the home. I don't know why, but it is a shame.

AmberLeaf · 14/10/2012 12:28

I think whether he seriously assaulted her in 2007 or 2 days ago would make no difference to me.

OP posts:
hannah0000035 · 14/10/2012 12:30

yes but how does it relate to this " opinion" you just mentioned amber?